Ambulatory Intensive Care for Medically Complex Patients at a Health Care Clinic for Individuals Experiencing Homelessness

Author:

Chan Brian12,Edwards Samuel T.13,Srikanth Priya4,Mitchell Matthew2,Devoe Meg12,Nicolaidis Christina15,Kansagara Devan13,Korthuis P. Todd16,Solotaroff Rachel2,Saha Somnath37

Affiliation:

1. Section of Addiction Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland

2. Central City Concern, Portland, Oregon

3. Center to Improve Veteran Involvement in Care, Veterans Affairs Portland Health Care System, Portland, Oregon

4. Biostatistics Design Program, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland

5. School of Social Work, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon

6. School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University–Portland State University, Portland

7. Division of General Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland

Abstract

ImportanceIntensive primary care interventions have been promoted to reduce hospitalization rates and improve health outcomes for medically complex patients, but evidence of their efficacy is limited.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of a multidisciplinary ambulatory intensive care unit (A-ICU) intervention on health care utilization and patient-reported outcomes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe Streamlined Unified Meaningfully Managed Interdisciplinary Team (SUMMIT) randomized clinical trial used a wait-list control design and was conducted at a health care clinic for patients experiencing homelessness in Portland, Oregon. The first patient was enrolled in August 2016, and the last patient was enrolled in November 2019. Included patients had 1 or more hospitalizations in the prior 6 months and 2 or more chronic medical conditions, substance use disorder, or mental illness. Data analysis was performed between March and May 2021.InterventionThe A-ICU included a team manager, a pharmacist, a nurse, care coordinators, social workers, and physicians. Activities included comprehensive 90-minute intake, transitional care coordination, and flexible appointments, with reduced panel size. Enhanced usual care (EUC), consisting of team-based primary care with access to community health workers and mental health, addiction treatment, and pharmacy services, served as the comparator. Participants who received EUC joined the A-ICU intervention after 6 months.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcome was the difference in rates of hospitalization (primary outcome), emergency department (ED) visits, and primary care physician (PCP) visits per person over 6 months (vs the prior 6 months). Patient-reported outcomes included changes in patient activation, experience, health-related quality of life, and self-rated health at 6 months (vs baseline). We performed an intention-to-treat analysis using a linear mixed-effects model with a random intercept for each patient to examine the association between study group and outcomes.ResultsThis study randomized 159 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.9 [9.8] years) to the A-ICU SUMMIT intervention (n = 80) or to EUC (n = 79). The majority of participants were men (102 [65.8%]) and most were White (121 [76.1%]). A total of 64 participants (41.0%) reported having unstable housing at baseline. Six-month hospitalizations decreased in both the A-ICU and EUC groups, with no difference between them (mean [SE], −0.6 [0.5] vs −0.9 [0.5]; difference, 0.3 [95% CI, −1.0 to 1.5]). Emergency department use did not differ between groups (mean [SE], −2.0 [1.0] vs 0.9 [1.0] visits per person; difference, −1.1 [95% CI, −3.7 to 1.6]). Primary care physician visits increased in the A-ICU group (mean [SE], 4.2 [1.6] vs −2.0 [1.6] per person; difference, 6.1 [95% CI, 1.8 to 10.4]). Patients in the A-ICU group reported improved social functioning (mean [SE], 4.7 [2.0] vs −1.1 [2.0]; difference, 5.8 [95% CI, 0.3 to 11.2]) and self-rated health (mean [SE], 0.7 [0.3] vs −0.2 [0.3]; difference, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.1 to 1.8]) compared with patients in the EUC group. No differences in patient activation or experience were observed.Conclusions and RelevanceThe A-ICU intervention did not change hospital or ED utilization at 6 months but increased PCP visits and improved patient well-being. Longer-term studies are needed to evaluate whether these observed improvements lead to eventual changes in acute care utilization.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03224858

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

General Medicine

Reference48 articles.

1. The Behavioral Model for Vulnerable Populations: application to medical care use and outcomes for homeless people.;Gelberg;Health Serv Res,2000

2. American medical home runs.;Milstein;Health Aff (Millwood),2009

3. The SUMMIT ambulatory-ICU primary care model for medically and socially complex patients in an urban federally qualified health center: study design and rationale.;Chan;Addict Sci Clin Pract,2018

4. “Super-utilizer” interventions: what they reveal about evaluation research, wishful thinking, and health equity.;Lantz;Milbank Q,2020

5. Addressing avoidable healthcare costs: time to cool off on hotspotting in primary care?;Marcotte;J Gen Intern Med,2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3