Evaluation of Knowledge Regarding Diagnostic Strategies for Genetic Diseases in Select Residents

Genetics education for physicians has been a popular publication topic in the United States and in Europe for over 20 years. Decreasing numbers of medical genetics professionals and an increasing volume of genetic information has created a dire need for increased genetics training in medical school and in clinical practice. This study aimed to assess how well pediatrics-focused primary care physicians apply their general genetics knowledge to clinical genetic testing using scenario-based questions. We chose to specifically focus on knowledge of the diagnostic applicability of Chromosomal Microarray (CMA) technology in pediatrics because of its recent recommendation by the International Standard Cytogenomic Array (ISCA) Consortium as a first-tier genetic test for individuals with developmental disabilities and/or congenital anomalies. Proficiency in ordering baseline genetic testing was evaluated for eighty-one respondents from four pediatrics-focused residencies (categorical pediatrics, pediatric neurology, internal medicine/pediatrics, and family practice) at two large residency programs in Houston, Texas. Similar to other studies, we found an overall deficit of genetic testing knowledge, especially among family practice residents. Interestingly, residents who elected to complete a genetics rotation in medical school scored significantly better than expected, as well as better than residents who did not elect to complete a genetics rotation. We suspect that the insufficient knowledge among physicians regarding a baseline genetics work-up is leading to redundant (i.e. concurrent karyotype and CMA) and incorrect (i.e. ordering CMA to detect achondroplasia) genetic testing and is contributing to rising health care costs in the United States. Our results provide specific teaching points upon which medical schools can focus education about clinical genetic testing and suggest that increased collaboration between primary care physicians and genetics professionals could benefit patient health care overall.

THE MULTIPLE LOCATION TIME WEIGHTED INDEX: USING PATIENT ACTIVITY SPACES TO CALCULATE PRIMARY CARE SERVICE AREAS

Geographic health planning analyses, such as service area calculations, are hampered by a lack of patient-specific geographic data. Using the limited patient address information in patient management systems, planners analyze patient origin based on home address. But activity space research done sparingly in public health and extensively in non-health related arenas uses multiple addresses per person when analyzing accessibility. Also, health care access research has shown that there are many non-geographic factors that influence choice of provider. Most planning methods, however, overlook non-geographic factors influencing choice of provider, and the limited data mean the analyses can only be related to home address. This research attempted to determine to what extent geography plays a part in patient choice of provider and to determine if activity space data can be used to calculate service areas for primary care providers. During Spring 2008, a convenience sample of 384 patients of a locally-funded Community Health Center in Houston, Texas, completed a survey that asked about what factors are important when he or she selects a health care provider. A subset of this group (336) also completed an activity space log that captured location and time data on the places where the patient regularly goes. Survey results indicate that for this patient population, geography plays a role in their choice of health care provider, but it is not the most important reason for choosing a provider. Other factors for choosing a health care provider such as the provider offering “free or low cost visits”, meeting “all of the patient’s health care needs”, and seeing “the patient quickly” were all ranked higher than geographic reasons. Analysis of the patient activity locations shows that activity spaces can be used to create service areas for a single primary care provider. Weighted activity-space-based service areas have the potential to include more patients in the service area since more than one location per patient is used. Further analysis of the logs shows that a reduced set of locations by time and type could be used for this methodology, facilitating ongoing data collection for activity-space-based planning efforts.

A study of patient satisfaction with medical care services in Yanbu al-Sinaiya, Saudi Arabia

This study attempts to provide reliable scientific data that will enable the health services department of the Royal Commission of Yanbu Al Sinaiyah, Saudi Arabia to improve the quality of health care services provided in their facilities. Patient satisfaction and dissatisfaction were investigated along seven dimensions: General satisfaction scale, Communication, Technical quality, Art of care, Continuity of care, Time spent with the doctor, and Access/Convenience/ and availability. Patient satisfaction parameters were compared for Saudi vs. non-Saudi, males vs. females, and for patients seen in the hospital vs. those seen in Al-nawa and Radwa primary care centers. The information was obtained by using a self-administered questionnaire. The results indicate that patients seen in Al-nawa primary care center were more satisfied with care than patients seen in the hospital who in turn were more satisfied than those seen in Radwa primary care center. The non-Saudi patients were more satisfied than the Saudi patients across all three facilities and satisfaction scales. The female patients were more satisfied than the male patients across all three facilities and satisfaction scales. ^

The multiple location time weighted index: Using patient activity spaces to calculate primary care service areas

Geographic health planning analyses, such as service area calculations, are hampered by a lack of patient-specific geographic data. Using the limited patient address information in patient management systems, planners analyze patient origin based on home address. But activity space research done sparingly in public health and extensively in non-health related arenas uses multiple addresses per person when analyzing accessibility. Also, health care access research has shown that there are many non-geographic factors that influence choice of provider. Most planning methods, however, overlook non-geographic factors influencing choice of provider, and the limited data mean the analyses can only be related to home address. This research attempted to determine to what extent geography plays a part in patient choice of provider and to determine if activity space data can be used to calculate service areas for primary care providers. ^ During Spring 2008, a convenience sample of 384 patients of a locally-funded Community Health Center in Houston, Texas, completed a survey that asked about what factors are important when he or she selects a health care provider. A subset of this group (336) also completed an activity space log that captured location and time data on the places where the patient regularly goes. ^ Survey results indicate that for this patient population, geography plays a role in their choice of health care provider, but it is not the most important reason for choosing a provider. Other factors for choosing a health care provider such as the provider offering "free or low cost visits", meeting "all of the patient's health care needs", and seeing "the patient quickly" were all ranked higher than geographic reasons. ^ Analysis of the patient activity locations shows that activity spaces can be used to create service areas for a single primary care provider. Weighted activity-space-based service areas have the potential to include more patients in the service area since more than one location per patient is used. Further analysis of the logs shows that a reduced set of locations by time and type could be used for this methodology, facilitating ongoing data collection for activity-space-based planning efforts. ^

Comparing experience of diabetes care with chronic illness care in the primary care clinic using the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC)

Purpose. The overall purpose of the study was to evaluate the patient experience relevant to the Chronic Care Model as measured by the PACIC. Chronic illness care of patients with diabetes was compared to those with other chronic illnesses. In addition, chronic illness care of Hispanics was compared to those of other race/ethnicity. ^ Methods. The setting of this study was 20 primary care practices located in San Antonio, TX. The subjects in this study were consecutive adult patients age >18 yrs. Data was collected via a survey (PACIC) administered to 40-60 consecutive adult patients in each primary care clinic who presented for a scheduled appointment. ^ Results. Patient experience of the Chronic Care Model is different among those with diabetes than those with other chronic diseases: those with diabetes report a higher PACIC score. (P = 0.012) Although Hispanic patients report a higher PACIC score, patient experience of the Chronic Care Model among Hispanic patients is not significantly different than that of patients of other race/ethnicity regardless of chronic disease. (P = 0.053) After controlling for the patient characteristics of age, education, health status, and race/ethnicity, the diabetes status of the patient remains significantly associated with the outcome, the PACIC score. (P = 0.033) ^ Conclusions. Diabetes is associated with a greater experience of the Chronic Care model. Contributing factors to diabetes patients’ greater experience of the Chronic Care Model include the greater heath care use and higher self-care needs unique to individuals with diabetes. Special consideration must be given to the specific needs diabetic patients to ensure effective interventions, higher patient education, greater patient compliance, and lower health care costs. ^

Prediction of sepsis in the burn intensive care unit patient

Sepsis is a significant cause for multiple organ failure and death in the burn patient, yet identification in this population is confounded by chronic hypermetabolism and impaired immune function. The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) determine the ability of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and American Burn Association (ABA) criteria to predict sepsis in the burn patient; and 2) develop a model representing the best combination of clinical predictors associated with sepsis in the same population. A retrospective, case-controlled, within-patient comparison of burn patients admitted to a single intensive care unit (ICU) was conducted for the period January 2005 to September 2010. Blood culture results were paired with clinical condition: "positive-sick"; "negative-sick", and "screening-not sick". Data were collected for the 72 hours prior to each blood culture. The most significant predictors were evaluated using logistic regression, Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) and ROC area under the curve (AUC) analyses to assess model predictive ability. Bootstrapping methods were employed to evaluate potential model over-fitting. Fifty-nine subjects were included, representing 177 culture periods. SIRS criteria were not found to be associated with culture type, with an average of 98% of subjects meeting criteria in the 3 days prior. ABA sepsis criteria were significantly different among culture type only on the day prior (p = 0.004). The variables identified for the model included: heart rate>130 beats/min, mean blood pressure<60 mmHg, base deficit<-6 mEq/L, temperature>36°C, use of vasoactive medications, and glucose>150 mg/d1. The model was significant in predicting "positive culture-sick" and sepsis state, with AUC of 0.775 (p < 0.001) and 0.714 (p < .001), respectively; comparatively, the ABA criteria AUC was 0.619 (p = 0.028) and 0.597 (p = .035), respectively. SIRS criteria are not appropriate for identifying sepsis in the burn population. The ABA criteria perform better, but only for the day prior to positive blood culture results. The time period useful to diagnose sepsis using clinical criteria may be limited to 24 hours. A combination of predictors is superior to individual variable trends, yet algorithms or computer support will be necessary for the clinician to find such models useful. ^

Global practice experience: A useful lens for understanding patient and staff perceptions of successful integration of health information technology in primary care

Making healthcare comprehensive and more efficient remains a complex challenge. Health Information Technology (HIT) is recognized as an important component of this transformation but few studies describe HIT adoption and it's effect on the bedside experience by physicians, staff and patients. This study applied descriptive statistics and correlation analysis to data from the Patient-Centered Medical Home National Demonstration Project (NDP) of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Thirty-six clinics were followed for 26 months by clinician/staff questionnaires and patient surveys. This study characterizes those clinics as well as staff and patient perspectives on HIT usefulness, the doctor-patient relationship, electronic medical record (EMR) implementation, and computer connections in the practice throughout the study. The Global Practice Experience factor, a composite score related to key components of primary care, was then correlated to clinician and patient perspectives. This study found wide adoption of HIT among NDP practices. Patient perspectives on HIT helpfulness on the doctor-patient showed a suggestive trend that approached statistical significance (p = 0.172). Clinicians and staff noted successful integration of EMR into clinic workflow and their perception of helpfulness to the doctor-patient relationship show a suggestive increase also approaching statistical significance (p=0.06). GPE was correlated with clinician/staff assessment of a helpful doctor-patient relationship midway through the study (R 0.460, p = 0.021) with the remaining time points nearing statistical significance. GPE was also correlated to both patient perspectives of EMR helpfulness in the doctor-patient relationship (R 0.601, p = 0.001) and computer connections (R 0.618, p = 0.0001) at the start of the study. ^