Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 8/2014

01-08-2014 | Original Research

Exploration of an Automated Approach for Receiving Patient Feedback After Outpatient Acute Care Visits

Authors: Eta S. Berner, EdD, Midge N. Ray, RN, MSN, Anantachai Panjamapirom, PhD, Richard S. Maisiak, PhD, James H. Willig, MD, Thomas M. English, PhD, Marc Krawitz, MBA, Christa R. Nevin, MSPH, Shannon Houser, PhD, Mark P. Cohen, MD, Gordon D. Schiff, MD

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 8/2014

Login to get access

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

To improve and learn from patient outcomes, particularly under new care models such as Accountable Care Organizations and Patient-Centered Medical Homes, requires establishing systems for follow-up and feedback.

OBJECTIVE

To provide post-visit feedback to physicians on patient outcomes following acute care visits.

DESIGN

A three-phase cross-sectional study [live follow-up call three weeks after acute care visits (baseline), one week post-visit live call, and one week post-visit interactive voice response system (IVRS) call] with three patient cohorts was conducted. A family medicine clinic and an HIV clinic participated in all three phases, and a cerebral palsy clinic participated in the first two phases. Patients answered questions about symptom improvement, medication problems, and interactions with the healthcare system.

PATIENTS

A total of 616 patients were included: 142 from Phase 1, 352 from Phase 2 and 122 from Phase 3.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary outcomes included: problem resolution, provider satisfaction with the system, and comparison of IVRS with live calls made by research staff.

KEY RESULTS

During both live follow-up phases, at least 96 % of patients who were reached completed the call compared to only 48 % for the IVRS phase. At baseline, 98 of 113 (88 %) patients reported improvement, as well as 167 of 196 (85 %) in the live one-week follow-up. In the one-week IVRS phase, 25 of 39 (64 %) reported improvement. In all phases, the majority of patients in both the improved and unimproved groups had not contacted their provider or another provider. While 63 % of providers stated they wanted to receive patient feedback, they varied in the extent to which they used the feedback reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients who do not improve as expected do not take action to further address unresolved problems. Systematic follow-up/feedback mechanisms can potentially identify and connect such patients to needed care.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Berwick DM. Launching accountable care organizations—the proposed rule for the Medicare Shared Savings Program. New Engl J Med. 2011;364(16):e32. PubMed PMID: 21452999.PubMedCrossRef Berwick DM. Launching accountable care organizations—the proposed rule for the Medicare Shared Savings Program. New Engl J Med. 2011;364(16):e32. PubMed PMID: 21452999.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference American College of Physicians. The advanced medical home: a patient-centered, physician-guided model of health care. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians; 2005. American College of Physicians. The advanced medical home: a patient-centered, physician-guided model of health care. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians; 2005.
3.
go back to reference Davis K, Schoenbaum SC, Audet AM. A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(10):953–957. PubMed PMID: 16191145. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1490238.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Davis K, Schoenbaum SC, Audet AM. A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(10):953–957. PubMed PMID: 16191145. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1490238.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Engineering a Learning Healthcare System. A look at the future: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. Engineering a Learning Healthcare System. A look at the future: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
6.
go back to reference Schiff GD. Minimizing diagnostic error: the importance of follow-up and feedback. Am J Med. 2008;121(5 Suppl):S38–S42. PubMed PMID: 18440354.PubMedCrossRef Schiff GD. Minimizing diagnostic error: the importance of follow-up and feedback. Am J Med. 2008;121(5 Suppl):S38–S42. PubMed PMID: 18440354.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Schiff GD, Bates DW. Can electronic clinical documentation help prevent diagnostic errors? New Engl J Med. 2010;362(12):1066–1069. PubMed PMID: 20335582.PubMedCrossRef Schiff GD, Bates DW. Can electronic clinical documentation help prevent diagnostic errors? New Engl J Med. 2010;362(12):1066–1069. PubMed PMID: 20335582.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Singh H, Graber M. Reducing diagnostic error through medical home-based primary care reform. JAMA. 2010;304(4):463–464. PubMed PMID: 20664048. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3120138.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Singh H, Graber M. Reducing diagnostic error through medical home-based primary care reform. JAMA. 2010;304(4):463–464. PubMed PMID: 20664048. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3120138.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Crandall B, Wears RL. Expanding perspectives on misdiagnosis. Am J Med. 2008;121(5 Suppl):S30–S33. PubMed PMID: 18440352.PubMedCrossRef Crandall B, Wears RL. Expanding perspectives on misdiagnosis. Am J Med. 2008;121(5 Suppl):S30–S33. PubMed PMID: 18440352.PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
go back to reference Chern CH, How CK, Wang LM, Lee CH, Graff L. Decreasing clinically significant adverse events using feedback to emergency physicians of telephone follow-up outcomes. Ann Emerg Med. 2005;45(1):15–23. PubMed PMID: 15635301.PubMedCrossRef Chern CH, How CK, Wang LM, Lee CH, Graff L. Decreasing clinically significant adverse events using feedback to emergency physicians of telephone follow-up outcomes. Ann Emerg Med. 2005;45(1):15–23. PubMed PMID: 15635301.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Forster AJ, Murff HJ, Peterson JF, Gandhi TK, Bates DW. The incidence and severity of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):161–167. PubMed PMID: 12558354.PubMedCrossRef Forster AJ, Murff HJ, Peterson JF, Gandhi TK, Bates DW. The incidence and severity of adverse events affecting patients after discharge from the hospital. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(3):161–167. PubMed PMID: 12558354.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Committee on Identifying and Preventing Medication Errors. Preventing medication errors: quality chasm series. Aspden P, Wolcott J, Bootman JL, Cronenwett LR, editors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007. Committee on Identifying and Preventing Medication Errors. Preventing medication errors: quality chasm series. Aspden P, Wolcott J, Bootman JL, Cronenwett LR, editors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007.
14.
go back to reference DeSalvo KB, Block JP, Muntner P, Merrill W. Predictors of variation in office visit interval assignment. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003;15(5):399–405. PubMed PMID: 14527983. Epub 2003/10/07. eng.PubMedCrossRef DeSalvo KB, Block JP, Muntner P, Merrill W. Predictors of variation in office visit interval assignment. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003;15(5):399–405. PubMed PMID: 14527983. Epub 2003/10/07. eng.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Haas JS, Amato M, Marinacci L, Orav EJ, Schiff GD, Bates DW. Do package inserts reflect symptoms experienced in practice?: assessment using an automated phone pharmacovigilance system with varenicline and zolpidem in a primary care setting. Drug Safety. 2012;35(8):623–628. PubMed PMID: 22764754. Epub 2012/07/07. eng.PubMedCrossRef Haas JS, Amato M, Marinacci L, Orav EJ, Schiff GD, Bates DW. Do package inserts reflect symptoms experienced in practice?: assessment using an automated phone pharmacovigilance system with varenicline and zolpidem in a primary care setting. Drug Safety. 2012;35(8):623–628. PubMed PMID: 22764754. Epub 2012/07/07. eng.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Haas JS, Iyer A, Orav EJ, Schiff GD, Bates DW. Participation in an ambulatory e-pharmacovigilance system. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. 2010;19(9):961–969. PubMed PMID: 20623512.PubMedCrossRef Haas JS, Iyer A, Orav EJ, Schiff GD, Bates DW. Participation in an ambulatory e-pharmacovigilance system. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. 2010;19(9):961–969. PubMed PMID: 20623512.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Haas JS, Klinger E, Marinacci LX, Brawarsky P, Orav EJ, Schiff GD, et al. Active pharmacovigilance and healthcare utilization. American Journal of Managed Care. 2012;18(11):e423–e428. PubMed PMID: 23198749. Epub 2012/12/04. eng.PubMed Haas JS, Klinger E, Marinacci LX, Brawarsky P, Orav EJ, Schiff GD, et al. Active pharmacovigilance and healthcare utilization. American Journal of Managed Care. 2012;18(11):e423–e428. PubMed PMID: 23198749. Epub 2012/12/04. eng.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Byrom B. Using IVRS in Clinical Trial Management. Appl Clin Trials. 2002;2002:36–42. Byrom B. Using IVRS in Clinical Trial Management. Appl Clin Trials. 2002;2002:36–42.
19.
go back to reference Willig JH, Krawitz M, Panjamapirom A, Ray MN, Nevin CR, English TM, et al. Closing the feedback loop: an interactive voice response system to provide follow-up and feedback in primary care settings. J Med Syst. 2013;37(2):9905. PubMed PMID: 23340825. Willig JH, Krawitz M, Panjamapirom A, Ray MN, Nevin CR, English TM, et al. Closing the feedback loop: an interactive voice response system to provide follow-up and feedback in primary care settings. J Med Syst. 2013;37(2):9905. PubMed PMID: 23340825.
20.
go back to reference Houser SH, Ray MN, Maisiak R, Panjamapirom A, Willig J, Schiff GD, et al. Telephone follow-up in primary care: can interactive voice response calls work? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:112–116. PubMed PMID: 23920526. Houser SH, Ray MN, Maisiak R, Panjamapirom A, Willig J, Schiff GD, et al. Telephone follow-up in primary care: can interactive voice response calls work? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:112–116. PubMed PMID: 23920526.
23.
go back to reference SPSS Statistics for Windows. 17.0 ed. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.; 2008. SPSS Statistics for Windows. 17.0 ed. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.; 2008.
24.
go back to reference Maisiak RS, Ray MN, Panjamapirom A, Houser S, Willig JH, English TM, et al. The general medication adherence (GMA) scale: Psychometric analysis of a new scale for the primary care setting. Washington, DC: Society for Behavioral Medicine; 2011. Maisiak RS, Ray MN, Panjamapirom A, Houser S, Willig JH, English TM, et al. The general medication adherence (GMA) scale: Psychometric analysis of a new scale for the primary care setting. Washington, DC: Society for Behavioral Medicine; 2011.
25.
go back to reference Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “meaningful use” regulation for electronic health records. New Engl J Med. 2010;363(6):501–504. PubMed PMID: 20647183.PubMedCrossRef Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “meaningful use” regulation for electronic health records. New Engl J Med. 2010;363(6):501–504. PubMed PMID: 20647183.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Exploration of an Automated Approach for Receiving Patient Feedback After Outpatient Acute Care Visits
Authors
Eta S. Berner, EdD
Midge N. Ray, RN, MSN
Anantachai Panjamapirom, PhD
Richard S. Maisiak, PhD
James H. Willig, MD
Thomas M. English, PhD
Marc Krawitz, MBA
Christa R. Nevin, MSPH
Shannon Houser, PhD
Mark P. Cohen, MD
Gordon D. Schiff, MD
Publication date
01-08-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 8/2014
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-2783-3

Other articles of this Issue 8/2014

Journal of General Internal Medicine 8/2014 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine