
PatientsChartingCourse
.pdfxx |
CONTENTS |
3 Clinical Data as a Public Good for Discovery |
69 |
Introduction, 69
Information Needs for a Learning Health System, 70
Farzad Mostashari
Opening Access to High-Value Data Sets, 74
Todd Park
Ensuring Data Integrity: Adressing Privacy Protection and Proprietary Concerns, 87
Don E. Detmer
4 Engaging Patients to Improve Science and |
|
Value in a Learning Health System |
95 |
Introduction, 95
Investing Patients in the Research and Continuous Improvement Enterprise, 96
Sharon F. Terry
Public and Patient Strategies to Improve Health System Performance, 103
James B. Conway
Communicating with Patients About Their Concerns, Expectations, and Preferences, 110
Karen Sepucha
5 Health Information Technology as the Engine for Learning |
119 |
Introduction, 119
The Meaningful Use of Health Information Technology, 120
David Blumenthal
New Classes of Data, New Opportunities to Learn, 123
Daniel R. Masys, Jack M. Starmer, and Jill M. Pulley
Web 2.0 and Patient Engagement, 128
Kamal Jethwani and Joseph C. Kvedar
6 Patients, Clinical Decisions, and Health Information |
|
Management in the Information Age |
137 |
Introduction, 137
Public and Patient Information Access and Use as a Core Care Component, 138
George D. Lundberg
Health Information Technology–Based Approaches to Health Management, 145
Paul C. Tang
CONTENTS |
xxi |
|
|
Health and Disease Management Outside the Clinic Doors: |
|
|
There’s an App for That!, 149 |
|
|
Doriane C. Miller |
|
7 |
Applying Evidence for Patient-Centered Care: Standards and |
|
|
Expectations |
159 |
|
Introduction, 159 |
|
|
The Role of Evidence in Patient-Centered Care, 160 |
|
|
Dale Collins Vidal |
|
|
Evidence Standards and Application: Right Care, Right Patient, |
|
|
Right Time, 167 |
|
|
Clifford Goodman |
|
|
Translation and Communication Needs for Care in the Face of |
|
|
Uncertain Evidence, 177 |
|
|
Fran M. Visco |
|
8 |
Team-Based Care and the Learning Culture |
187 |
|
Introduction, 187 |
|
|
Practical Experience with Collaborative Models in the Health |
|
|
Professions, 188 |
|
|
Allan S. Frankel and Michael Leonard |
|
|
Measures and Strategies for Clinical Excellence and Continuous |
|
|
Improvement, 196 |
|
|
Joyce Lammert |
|
|
Care Cooperation and Continuity Across Clinicians, Facilities, |
|
|
and Systems, 202 |
|
|
Alice Bonner, Craig Schneider, and Joel S. Weissman |
|
9 |
Incentives Aligned with Value and Learning |
213 |
|
Introduction, 213 |
|
|
Paying for Value and Science-Driven Care, 214 |
|
|
Michael E. Chernew |
|
|
Generating Evidence to Guide Care, 219 |
|
|
Richard Gilfillan |
|
|
Creating a Learning Culture, 228 |
|
|
Anne F. Weiss and Bianca M. Freda |
|
10 |
Common Themes and Opportunities for Action |
235 |
|
Introduction, 235 |
|
|
Common Themes, 235 |
|
|
Strategies for Moving Forward, 239 |
|
|
Looking Ahead to Next Steps, 242 |
|
xxii |
|
CONTENTS |
Appendixes |
|
|
A |
Workshop Agenda |
247 |
B |
Biographical Sketches of Workshop Participants |
253 |
C |
Workshop Attendee List |
273 |
D |
The Learning Health System Series: Workshop Common |
|
|
Themes |
283 |
Abbreviations and Acronyms
ACA |
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010) |
ACGME |
Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education |
AF4Q |
Aligning Forces for Quality |
AHRQ |
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality |
AMA |
American Medical Association |
AMIA |
American Medical Informatics Association |
ARRA |
American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (2009) |
CCCP |
Connected Cardiac Care Program |
CER |
comparative effectiveness research |
CMS |
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services |
CNVs |
copy number variants |
CRM |
crew resource management |
CRS |
Care Records Service (UK) |
DHMC |
Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center |
EGAPP |
Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and |
|
Prevention |
EHR |
electronic health record |
eMERGE |
electronic MEdical Records and GEnomics |
EMR |
electronic medical record |
FCC |
Federal Coordinating Council |
FDA |
Food and Drug Administration |
xxiii
xxiv |
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS |
GDP |
gross domestic product |
GEDDI |
Genetics for Early Disease Detection and Intervention to |
|
Improve Health Outcomes |
GHP |
Geisinger Health Plan |
GHS |
Geisinger Health System |
GWAS |
genome-wide association study |
HCC |
Hierarchical Condition Categories |
HEDIS |
Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set |
HHS |
Department of Health and Human Services |
HIPAA |
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act |
HIT |
health information technology |
HITECH |
Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical |
|
Health Act (2009) |
HPV |
human papillomavirus |
IHI |
Institute for Healthcare Improvement |
INR |
International Normalized Ratio |
IOM |
Institute of Medicine |
IPADS |
International Patient Decision Aids Standards |
IRB |
institutional review board |
IT |
information technology |
JAMA |
Journal of the American Medical Association |
MA |
Medicare Advantage |
NBCC |
National Breast Cancer Coalition |
NCI |
National Cancer Institute |
NHS (UK) |
National Health Service |
NIH |
National Institutes of Health |
NWHIN |
Nationwide Health Information Network |
OECD |
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development |
OMB |
Office of Management and Budget |
ONC |
Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information |
|
Technology |
PAMF |
Palo Alto Medical Foundation |
PCMH |
patient-centered medical home |
PCORI |
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute |
PheWAS |
phenome-wide scanning |
PHR |
personal health record |
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS |
xxv |
|
PSA |
prostate-specific antigen |
|
PXE |
pseudoxanthoma elasticum |
|
RCT |
randomized controlled trial |
|
REP |
Rochester Epidemiology Project |
|
RPIWs |
Rapid process improvement workshops |
|
RWJF |
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation |
|
SCP |
shared care plan |
|
SHARP |
Strategic Health IT Advanced Research Projects |
|
SNP |
single nucleotide polymorphism |
|
SORT |
Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy |
|
SR |
systematic review |
|
SSRI |
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor |
|
STEPPS |
Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient |
|
|
Safety |
|
USPSTF |
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force |
|
VAP |
ventilator-associated pneumonia |
|
VMMC |
Virginia Mason Medical Center |
|
Synopsis and Overview
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
The prosperity of a nation is tied fundamentally to the health and well-being of its citizens. It follows, then, that citizens—each one a past, current, or future patient—should represent both the healthcare system’s unwavering focus, and its fully engaged agents for change. This precept has several major implications. It means that the quality of health care should not be judged solely by whether clinical decisions are informed by the best available scientific evidence, but also by whether care accounts for a patient’s personal circumstances and preferences. It implies that careful listening should be the starting point for every patient encounter. And it suggests that the success of and innovations in healthcare delivery should depend on direct consumer engagement in the design of healthcare models and their aims.
One of the central lessons of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report
Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century is that much of health care in the United States has lost its focus on the patient (IOM, 2001). Instead, the healthcare system has been designed and motivated primarily by the perspectives of its component facilities, companies, payers, and providers. Crossing the Quality Chasm urges that care be refocused around six aims: care should be safe, effective, patientcentered, timely, efficient, and equitable. In the decade since the report was published, it has become even clearer that citizen and patient engagement is central to taking advantage of advances in the personalization of care based on genetics, preferences, and circumstances. Building off the Chasm
1
2 |
PATIENTS CHARTING THE COURSE |
report, a learning health system requires that patients help chart the course and operation of the learning process.
In this context, the IOM, under the auspices of the Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care, focused the tenth workshop in its Learning Health System series on public and patient engagement and leadership. This volume, Patients Charting the Course: Citizen Engagement and the Learning Health System, presents a summary of the issues and perspectives addressed at that meeting.
As discussed by many participants in the meeting, most health systems today are not centered on patients. Instead, volume drives service; supply influences demand; and clinician—not patient—preferences shape practice (Wennberg et al., 2007). The notion of patient-centeredness often still feels unfamiliar, even disruptive, for many of those unexposed to the advantages of such a culture (Berwick, 2009).
Patients have shown an interest in becoming more involved and learning more about their conditions. A Pew Research Center Survey found that 61 percent of adults go online to seek information on specific diseases, medical treatments, and other health subjects. Although the increased availability of health information is important, new communication approaches are needed to provide information that is reliable, relevant, and understandable so patients can make informed healthcare decisions.
Data and information are a first step toward improving communications between providers and patients. Providers will increasingly need to discuss with patients the risks and benefits of competing treatment options and engage patients in shared decision making about their treatment choices. This represents a shift away from the historical model of medicine toward one in which physicians and patients work together to manage complex conditions, and make decisions on the basis not only of the best medical knowledge, but also the patient’s life circumstances, preferences, and personal biology.
Recent legislative efforts and national interest around these issues have provided an important impetus for progress and prompted a reassessment of priorities and the articulation of practical next steps for developing a learning health system. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) included more than $1.1 billion to enhance the nation’s capacity for comparative effectiveness research and nearly $20 billion for the adoption and use of health information technology through the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act. Through incentives for the meaningful use of electronic medical records, the HITECH Act will encourage the adoption of electronic medical records by clinician practices and hospitals, which will enable improved access to clinical information, coordination of care across multiple healthcare settings, and a comprehensive record of a patient’s medical history. This will provide
SYNOPSIS AND OVERVIEW |
3 |
the foundation for many aspects of the learning health system, including expanded clinical data for research, patient access to their own health information, and new models of care outside the traditional clinical encounter.
Signed into law one week before the workshop, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) underscored the importance of patient choice and engagement, including provisions to promote choice, accountability, consideration of patient preferences, and shared healthcare decision making. As this law is implemented, new opportunities will become available for establishing innovative models to deliver care, creating incentives to coordinate and improve care quality and value, and expanding the clinical workforce.
THE ROUNDTABLE AND THE
LEARNING HEALTH SYSTEM SERIES
The IOM Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care has since 2006,- provided a venue for health leaders from various stakeholder sectors—health professionals, patients, health system leaders, insurers, employers, manufacturers, information technology, research—to work cooperatively to address their common interest in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of health care. The Roundtable members have set the goal that, by 2020, 90 percent of clinical decisions will be supported by accurate, timely, and up-to-date information and will reflect the best available evidence. Over the past five years, the Roundtable’s Learning Health System series of workshops has identified and considered the key elements whose transformation can be central to achieving this goal: clinical research, clinical data, information technology, evidence standards, healthcare tools, caregiver culture, patient engagement, and financial incentives. For each of these elements, the workshops have explored priorities and approaches integral to harnessing interests and expertise across healthcare sectors to drive improvements in the value of medical care delivered in the United States. The following publications summarizing these workshops offer perspectives on the issues involved, and identify priorities and projects in need of cooperative stakeholder engagement:
•The Learning Healthcare System (2007)
•Evidence-Based Medicine and the Changing Nature of Health Care (2008)
•Leadership Commitments to Improve Value in Health Care: Finding Common Ground (2009)
•Value in Health Care: Accounting for Cost, Quality, Safety, Outcomes, and Innovation (2010)