LSU Health Services Research Program (LSU HSRP) (Text Version)

Slide presentation from the AHRQ 2009 conference.

Slide Presentation from the AHRQ 2009 Annual Conference


On September 14, 2009, Ron Horswell made this presentation at the 2009 Annual Conference. Select to access the PowerPoint® presentation (720 KB) (Plugin Software Help).


Slide 1

Slide 1. LSU Health Services Research Program (LSU HSRP)

LSU Health Services Research Program (LSU HSRP)

Ron Horswell, PhD

Slide 2

Slide 2. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Mission: Accelerating translation of evidence into practice, emphasizing topics of importance to the LSU Health Care Services Division (LSU HCSD), a provider system serving low-income, predominantly uninsured patients.
  • Funded by AHRQ from 2001 to 2006.
  • Original P.I. was Fred Cerise, MD.

Slide 3

Slide 3. LSU HCSD System

LSU HCSD System

An image of the state of Louisiana is shown. On the map, the LSU HCSD System is marked.

Slide 4

Slide 4. LSU HCSD Disease Management and Population Health Programs

LSU HCSD Disease Management and Population Health Programs

An image of the LSU HCSD Disease Management and Population Health Programs is shown.

Slide 5

Slide 5. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Methods and Program Elements (initially):
  • Recruit (largely clinical faculty) participants.
  • Pair participants with research mentors.
  • Core Program Office.
  • Works in Progress meetings.
  • Affiliated with the Harvard Pediatric Health Services Research Program
    • Sharon Muret-Wagstaff, PhD.
    • Donald Goldman, MD.

Slide 6

Slide 6. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Results (by Sept 2006):
  • 25 projects.
  • $680,000 in additional funding.
  • Published 11 papers, probably approximately 15 by now, with some still in progress.

Slide 7

Slide 7. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Core Program Office:
  • Most successful of the original program elements.
  • Shannon McNabb, MA MPH.
  • Managed IRB relationships.
  • Managed the Works in Progress meeting process.
  • Participated in research oversight committees at HCSD sites.
  • Helped instigate much higher LSU HCSD participation in "external" research.

Slide 8

Slide 8. Selected Projects

Selected Projects

  • DIABETES: Evaluation of a telemedicine diabetes foot program.
  • DIABETES: Barriers to diabetic eye care.
  • DIABETES: Effect of indigent pharmacy medication program.
  • HF: Mortality benefit of a HF disease management program.
  • HF patient registry development.
  • HF: Cost effectiveness of using BNP as a screener for heart failure.
  • HF: Heart failure acute event prediction model.
  • TOBACCO: Survey assessing patterns of tobacco use among HCSD patients.
  • HTN: Hypertension management using group visits.
  • NEONATES: IT network supporting preventive services for at-risk infants.
  • DISPARITIES: Racial disparities and qualify of care in disease management programs.
  • DISPARITIES: Decomposition of sources of variation in disease management performance measures.
  • CANCER: Comparison of mammography screening levels across three population (Medicare, Medicaid, and the Uninsured.)
  • CANCER: Relationship of screening mammography to tumor stage at diagnosis.
  • CANCER: Relationship of tumor stage at diagnosis to survival.

Slide 9

Slide 9. Selected Projects

Selected Projects

  • DIABETES: Evaluation of a telemedicine diabetes foot program.
  • DIABETES: Barriers to diabetic eye care.
  • DIABETES: Effect of indigent pharmacy medication program.
  • HF: Mortality benefit of a HF disease management program.
  • HF patient registry development.
  • HF: Cost effectiveness of using BNP as a screener for heart failure.
  • HF: Heart failure acute event prediction model.
  • TOBACCO: Survey assessing patterns of tobacco use among HCSD patients.
  • HTN: Hypertension management using group visits.
  • NEONATES: IT network supporting preventive services for at-risk infants.
  • DISPARITIES: Racial disparities and qualify of care in disease management programs.
  • DISPARITIES: Decomposition of sources of variation in disease management performance measures.
  • CANCER: Comparison of mammography screening levels across three population (Medicare, Medicaid, and the Uninsured.)
  • CANCER: Relationship of screening mammography to tumor stage at diagnosis.
  • CANCER: Relationship of tumor stage at diagnosis to survival.

Slide 10

Slide 10. LSU HSRP themes: Disparities and Underserved Patient Groups

LSU HSRP themes: Disparities and Underserved Patient Groups

  • Conclusions:
    • "Self pay" does worst.
    • Small racial disparities on processes.
    • More disparities on outcomes.
    • Variation across clinics within sites is greater than variation across sites.
    • Focus on patient subgroups with persistent problems.
    • Need to get patients to "in-care" status and keep them there.

Slide 11

Slide 11. Eye Exam Within Past Year

Eye Exam Within Past Year

An image of a graph that shows GenRace, Insured, Site, and SiteClinic versus Fraction of Unique Patients is shown on the screen.

Slide 12

Slide 12. Eye Exam Within Past Year

Eye Exam Within Past Year

  • Pc sustain: .5
  • Pc new: .4
  • Pc 1 year: .3
  • Pc 2 year: .15
  • Pc none: .12

Slide 13

Slide 13. Fraction with HbA1c under 7%

Fraction with HbA1c under 7%

An image of a graph that shows GenRace, Insured, Site, and SiteClinic versus Fraction of Unique Patients is shown on the screen.

Slide 14

Slide 14. Fraction with HbA1c under 7%

Fraction with HbA1c under 7%

  • Pc sustain: .5
  • Pc new: .45
  • Pc 1 year: .40
  • Pc 2 year: .33
  • Pc none: .31

Slide 15

Slide 15. Selected Projects

Selected Projects

  • DIABETES: Evaluation of a telemedicine diabetes foot program.
  • DIABETES: Barriers to diabetic eye care.
  • DIABETES: Effect of indigent pharmacy medication program.
  • HF: Mortality benefit of a HF disease management program.
  • HF patient registry development.
  • HF: Cost effectiveness of using BNP as a screener for heart failure.
  • HF: Heart failure acute event prediction model.
  • TOBACCO: Survey assessing patterns of tobacco use among HCSD patients.
  • HTN: Hypertension management using group visits.
  • NEONATES: IT network supporting preventive services for at-risk infants.
  • DISPARITIES: Racial disparities and qualify of care in disease management programs.
  • DISPARITIES: Decomposition of sources of variation in disease management performance measures.
  • CANCER: Comparison of mammography screening levels across three population (Medicare, Medicaid, and the Uninsured.)
  • CANCER: Relationship of screening mammography to tumor stage at diagnosis.
  • CANCER: Relationship of tumor stage at diagnosis to survival.

Slide 16

Slide 16. CONCENTRATION ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL EVENTS: Events Saved Per Patient Treated

CONCENTRATION ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL EVENTS
Events Saved Per Patient Treated

An image of graph that shows Accumulative Average Event per Patient Vs. Fractiles by Descending Predicted Prob. is shown on the screen.

Average event per patient = 413/1883 = .22

Slide 17

Slide 17. HbA1c over time

HbA1c over time

A graph of "HbA1c over time" is shown on the screen.

Slide 18

Slide 18. Selected Projects

Selected Projects

  • DIABETES: Evaluation of a telemedicine diabetes foot program.
  • DIABETES: Barriers to diabetic eye care.
  • DIABETES: Effect of indigent pharmacy medication program.
  • HF: Mortality benefit of a HF disease management program.
  • HF patient registry development.
  • HF: Cost effectiveness of using BNP as a screener for heart failure.
  • HF: Heart failure acute event prediction model.
  • TOBACCO: Survey assessing patterns of tobacco use among HCSD patients.
  • HTN: Hypertension management using group visits.
  • NEONATES: IT network supporting preventive services for at-risk infants.
  • DISPARITIES: Racial disparities and qualify of care in disease management programs.
  • DISPARITIES: Decomposition of sources of variation in disease management performance measures.
  • CANCER: Comparison of mammography screening levels across three population (Medicare, Medicaid, and the Uninsured.)
  • CANCER: Relationship of screening mammography to tumor stage at diagnosis.
  • CANCER: Relationship of tumor stage at diagnosis to survival.

Slide 19

Slide 19. Relative cost effectiveness a function of:

Relative cost effectiveness a function of:

  • Cost of BNP.
  • Cost of Echocardiography.
  • Prevalence of undiagnosed HF.
  • Sensitivity of status quo.
  • Specificity of status quo.

A graph of BNP Sensitivity Vs. BNP Specificity is shown on the screen.

Slide 20

Slide 20. Selected Projects

Selected Projects

  • DIABETES: Evaluation of a telemedicine diabetes foot program.
  • DIABETES: Barriers to diabetic eye care.
  • DIABETES: Effect of indigent pharmacy medication program.
  • HF: Mortality benefit of a HF disease management program.
  • HF patient registry development.
  • HF: Cost effectiveness of using BNP as a screener for heart failure.
  • HF: Heart failure acute event prediction model.
  • TOBACCO: Survey assessing patterns of tobacco use among HCSD patients.
  • HTN: Hypertension management using group visits.
  • NEONATES: IT network supporting preventive services for at-risk infants.
  • DISPARITIES: Racial disparities and qualify of care in disease management programs.
  • DISPARITIES: Decomposition of sources of variation in disease management performance measures.
  • CANCER: Comparison of mammography screening levels across three population (Medicare, Medicaid, and the Uninsured.)
  • CANCER: Relationship of screening mammography to tumor stage at diagnosis.
  • CANCER: Relationship of tumor stage at diagnosis to survival.

Slide 21

Slide 21. HEDIS Measure BCS

HEDIS® Measure BCS

NOTE: Graph shows only providers with 10+ recipients.
Symbol size proportional to # of recipients.
Green line (40%) is State Average.

Slide 22

Slide 22. HEDIS Measure BCS

HEDIS® Measure BCS

BCS - Breast Cancer Screening measures the percentage of women 40 - 69 years of age who had a mammogram to screen for breast cancer.

Provider GroupDenominatorNumeratorHEDIS
FQHC6,4392,60340.40%
LSU12,7096,79053.40%
RHC7,9813,10038.80%
Other61,91023,17937.40%
Total89,03935,67240.06%

Slide 23

Slide 23. HEDIS Measure BCS - Eye Exam

HEDIS® Measure CDC - Eye Exam

NOTE: Graph shows only providers with 10+ recipients.
Symbol size proportional to # of recipients.
Green line (38%) is State Average.

Slide 24

Slide 24. HEDIS Measure BCS - Eye Exam

HEDIS® Measure CDC - Eye Exam

CDC - Comprehensive Diabetes Care is a set of measures for members 18-75 years of age with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The measures include: eye exam, HbA1c, LDL-C and screening for nephropathy. Each measure is calculated individually. Presented in this chart is the CDC-Eye Exam measure.

Provider GroupDenominatorNumeratorHEDIS
FQHC3,3881,19835.40%
LSU7,2964,33359.40%
RHC3,8941,30833.60%
Other32,19710,41832.40%
Total46,77517,25736.89%

Slide 25

Slide 25. Selected Projects

Selected Projects

  • DIABETES: Evaluation of a telemedicine diabetes foot program.
  • DIABETES: Barriers to diabetic eye care.
  • DIABETES: Effect of indigent pharmacy medication program.
  • HF: Mortality benefit of a HF disease management program.
  • HF patient registry development.
  • HF: Cost effectiveness of using BNP as a screener for heart failure.
  • HF: Heart failure acute event prediction model.
  • TOBACCO: Survey assessing patterns of tobacco use among HCSD patients.
  • HTN: Hypertension management using group visits.
  • NEONATES: IT network supporting preventive services for at-risk infants.
  • DISPARITIES: Racial disparities and qualify of care in disease management programs.
  • DISPARITIES: Decomposition of sources of variation in disease management performance measures.
  • CANCER: Comparison of mammography screening levels across three population (Medicare, Medicaid, and the Uninsured.)
  • CANCER: Relationship of screening mammography to tumor stage at diagnosis.
  • CANCER: Relationship of tumor stage at diagnosis to survival.

Slide 26

Slide 26. Distribution of Stage at Diagnosis

Distribution of Stage at Diagnosis

Insitu

  • HCSD Patients: 14
  • Fly-in: 7

Localized

  • HCSD Patients: 49
  • Fly-in: 40

Regional

  • HCSD Patients: 35
  • Fly-in: 42

Distant

  • HCSD Patients: 4
  • Fly-in: 11

Slide 27

Slide 27. Survivor functions

Survivor functions

A graph of Survivor functions (Unscreened Probability) adjusted for age=55 and race=Afm is shown on the screen.

Slide 28

Slide 28. Screening and Tumor Stage

Screening and Tumor Stage

 2-year Screening historyIn SituLocalizeRegionalDistant
In Situ cases includedscreened0.1440.4700.3530.033
unscreened0.0810.4650.3860.068
Risk ratio (screened/unscreened)1.781.010.910.49
In Situ cases excludedscreened 0.5490.4120.039
unscreened 0.5060.4200.074
Risk ratio (screened/unscreened) 1.080.980.53

Slide 29

Slide 29. Survivor functions

Survivor functions

A graph of Survivor functions (Probability of Survival) adjusted for age=55 and race=Afm is shown on the screen.

Slide 30

Slide 30. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Our recommendations to the LSU HCSD when the LSU HSRP program concluded:
  • Maintain Core Office (partially done).
  • Abandon mentoring concept (done).
  • Create an analysis department (partially done).
  • Become programmatic and purposeful (not done).

Slide 31

Slide 31. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Observation:
  • "…A distinction exists between:
    • A research program designed to mentor individual researchers and move them along their career paths, and
    • A research program designed to address major needs within client organizations' patient populations."

Slide 32

Slide 32. Purposeful and Programmatic

Purposeful and Programmatic

AreaQIRetrospectiveProspectiveSummary
Diabetes(1) Accu-Chek(1) Chiou,
(2) pharmacy paper(3) eye camera
(1) Depression & diabetes(1) HbA1c trends
CHF(1) CHF registry(1) predict admit,
(2) predict mortality, (3) IV lasix
None(1)Beta Blocker trend
(2) IP and ER trends
AsthmaNone(1) EKL asthma intercept programNone(1) IP and ER trends
HIVNoneNoneNoneNone
Cancer (1) screening and stage,
(2) stage and survival
None(1) mammography rate history
(2) comparison to Medicaid
Tobacco (1) Baseline patient surveyNoneNone
General (1) population model
(2) capacity project
(3) sources of variation/disparities project
 (1) disparities summary

Slide 33

Slide 33. LSU HSRP

LSU HSRP

  • Our recommendations to the LSU HCSD when the LSU HSRP program concluded:
  • Maintain Core Office.
  • Abandon mentoring concept.
  • Create an analysis department.
  • Become programmatic and purposeful.
  • Maintain chronic disease patient registries.
  • Systematic analysis to identify sources of variation (potential opportunities).
  • Create a practice-based research network.
  • Identify patient subgroups with persistent problems and develop interventions.
  • Develop and test means of patient empowerment.

Slide 34

Slide 34. Practice-based Research Network

Practice-based Research Network

  • We suggested:
  • LSU HSCD "medical home"-like clinics as participants.
  • Both QIPs and research projects.
  • Would provide the platform for mutually beneficial collaboration with other organizations and with various faculty.
  • This would enhance funding prospects.
  • Flow:
    • Idea.
    • Retrospective.
    • Pilot.
    • Larger project.
    • Funding.

Slide 35

Slide 35. Reasons for LSU PBRN

Reasons for LSU PBRN

  • Tele-monitoring projects
    • HF patients with history of ED/IP events.
    • Diabetes patients with persistently high HbA1c levels.
  • Medical home development.

Slide 36

Slide 36. Medical Home Patients

Medical Home Patients

An image of a flowchart of "Medical Home Patients" is shown on the screen.

Slide 37

Slide 37. Medical Home Patients

Medical Home Patients

An image of a revised flowchart of "Medical Home Patients" is shown on the screen.

Slide 38

Slide 38. Reasons for LSU PBRN

Reasons for LSU PBRN

  • Tele-monitoring projects
    • HF patients with history of ED/IP events.
    • Diabetes patients with persistently high HbA1c levels.
  • Medical home development.
  • Need to link quality improvement and access improvement to business model.

Slide 39

Slide 39. LSU HCSD Screening Colonoscopy Capacity Requirements

LSU HCSD Screening Colonoscopy Capacity Requirements

Simulation Results: Long-run Needed Capacity for combinations of Assumptions
 Policy: Screen Every 5 YearsPolicy: Screen Every 10 Years
% of incoming patients already screenedScreen
Uninsured only
Screen
All
Screen
Uninsured only
Screen
All
0%8,223 (98)15,463 (184)7,261 (86)14,340 (171)
25%7,173 (85)13,397 (159)6,075 (72)11,538 (137)
50%6,120 (73)11,324 (135)4,679 (56)8,918 (106)
75%5,125 (61)9,123 (109)3,376 (40)6,322 (75)
100%4,100 (49)7,043 (84)2,096 (25)3,632 (43)

Slide 40

Slide 40. End

END

Current as of December 2009
Internet Citation: LSU Health Services Research Program (LSU HSRP) (Text Version). December 2009. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/news/events/conference/2009/horswell/index.html