Patient outcomes at 26 months in the patient-centered medical home National Demonstration Project
- PMID: 20530395
- PMCID: PMC2885729
- DOI: 10.1370/afm.1121
Patient outcomes at 26 months in the patient-centered medical home National Demonstration Project
Erratum in
- Ann Fam Med. 2010 Jul-Aug;8(4):369
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient outcomes in the National Demonstration Project (NDP) of practices' transition to patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs).
Methods: In 2006, a total of 36 family practices were randomized to facilitated or self-directed intervention groups. Progress toward the PCMH was measured by independent assessments of how many of 39 predominantly technological NDP model components the practices adopted. We evaluated 2 types of patient outcomes with repeated cross-sectional surveys and medical record audits at baseline, 9 months, and 26 months: patient-rated outcomes and condition-specific quality of care outcomes. Patient-rated outcomes included core primary care attributes, patient empowerment, general health status, and satisfaction with the service relationship. Condition-specific outcomes were measures of the quality of care from the Ambulatory Care Quality Alliance (ACQA) Starter Set and measures of delivery of clinical preventive services and chronic disease care.
Results: Practices adopted substantial numbers of NDP components over 26 months. Facilitated practices adopted more new components on average than self-directed practices (10.7 components vs 7.7 components, P=.005). ACQA scores improved over time in both groups (by 8.3% in the facilitated group and by 9.1% in the self-directed group, P <.0001) as did chronic care scores (by 5.2% in the facilitated group and by 5.0% in the self-directed group, P=.002), with no significant differences between groups. There were no improvements in patient-rated outcomes. Adoption of PCMH components was associated with improved access (standardized beta [Sbeta]=0.32, P = .04) and better prevention scores (Sbeta=0.42, P=.001), ACQA scores (Sbeta=0.45, P = .007), and chronic care scores (Sbeta=0.25, P =.08).
Conclusions: After slightly more than 2 years, implementation of PCMH components, whether by facilitation or practice self-direction, was associated with small improvements in condition-specific quality of care but not patient experience. PCMH models that call for practice change without altering the broader delivery system may not achieve their intended results, at least in the short term.
Figures

References
-
- American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), American College of Physicians (ACP), American Osteopathic Association (AOA). Joint Principles of the Patient-Centered Medical Home. February 2007. http://www.aafp.org/pcmh/principles.pdf. Accessed Jun 11, 2009.
-
- Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative. http://www.pcpcc.net/. Accessed Jun 25, 2009.
-
- National Committee for Quality Assurance. Physician Practice Connections—Patient-Centered Medical Home. http://www.ncqa.org/tabid/631/Default.aspx. Accessed Jun 11, 2009.
-
- Iglehart JK. No place like home—testing a new model of care delivery. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(12):1200–1202. - PubMed
-
- Boult C, Reider L, Frey K, et al. Early effects of “Guided Care” on the quality of health care for multimorbid older persons: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63(3):321–327. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous