Workflow standardization of a novel team care model to improve chronic care: a quasi-experimental study

摘要

Background Team-based chronic care models have not been widely adopted in community settings, partly due to their varying effectiveness in randomized control trials, implementation challenges, and concerns about physician acceptance. The Palo Alto Medical Foundation designed and implemented “Champion,” a novel team-based model that includes new standard work (e.g. proactive patient outreach, pre-visit schedule grooming, depression screening, care planning, health coaching) to support patients’ self-management of hypertension and diabetes. We investigated whether Champion improved clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a quasi-experimental study comparing the Champion clinic-level intervention ( n =?38 physicians) with a usual care clinic ( n =?37 physicians) in Northern California. The primary outcomes, blood pressure and glycohemoglobin (A1c), were analyzed using a piecewise linear growth curve model for patients exposed to a Champion physician visit ( n =?3156) or usual care visit ( n =?8034) in the two years prior and one year post implementation. Secondary outcomes were provider experience, compared at baseline and 12?months in both the intervention and usual care clinics using multi-level ordered logistic modeling, and electronic health record based fidelity measures. Results Compared to usual care, in the first 6?months after a Champion physician visit, diabetes patients aged 18-75 experienced an additional -1.13?mm Hg (95% CI: -2.23 to -0.04) decline in diastolic blood pressure and -0.47 (95% CI: -0.61 to -0.33) decline in A1c. There were no additional improvements in blood pressure or A1c 6 to 12?months post physician visit. At 12?months, Champion physicians reported improved experience with managing chronic care patients in 6 of 7 survey items ( p Conclusions Champion standard work improved glycemic control over the first 6?months and physicians’ experience with managing chronic care; changes in blood pressure were not clinically meaningful. Our results suggest the need to understand the relationship between the intervention, the contextual features of implementation, and fidelity to further improve chronic disease outcomes. This study was retrospectively registered with the ISRCTN Registry on March 15, 2017 (ISRCTN11341906).