Cited by 21Primary Care and Health OutcomesPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareHealth Policy Implementation Science

Linking Practice Adoption of Patient Engagement Strategies and Relational Coordination to Patient‐Reported Outcomes in Accountable Care Organizations

Open access
RODRIGUEZ, HECTOR P., POON, BING YING, WANG, EMILY, SHORTELL, STEPHEN M.·2019·The Milbank Quarterly

Abstract

Policy Points: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have incentives to promote the adoption of patient engagement strategies such as shared decision making and self‐management support programs to improve patient outcomes and contain health care costs. High adoption of patient engagement strategies among ACO‐affiliated practices did not improve patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) of physical, emotional, and social function among adult patients with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease over a one‐year time frame, likely because implementing these strategies requires extensive clinician and staff training, workflow redesign, and patient participation over time. A dominant focus on improving clinical measures to meet external requirements may crowd out time needed for care team members to address other outcomes that matter to patients, including PROs. Payers and policy‐makers should explicitly incentivize the collection and use of PROs when contracting with ACOs. Context: Adult primary care practices of accountable care organizations (ACOs) are adopting a range of patient engagement strategies, but little is known about how these strategies are related to patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and how relational coordination among team members aids implementation. Methods: We used a mixed‐methods cohort study design integrating administrative and clinical data with two data collection waves (2014‐2015 and 2016‐2017) of clinician and staff surveys (n = 764), surveys of adult patients with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD) (n = 1,276), and key informant interviews of clinicians, staff, and administrators (n = 103). Multivariable linear regression estimated the relationship of practice adoption of patient engagement strategies, relational coordination, and PROs of physical, social, and emotional function. The mediating role of patient activation was examined using cross‐lagged panel models. Key informant interviews assessed how relational coordination influences the implementation of patient engagement strategies. Findings: There were no differential improvements in PROs among patients of practices with high vs. low adoption of patient engagement strategies or among patients of practices with high vs. low relational coordination. The Patient Activation Measure (PAM) is strongly related to better physical, emotional, and social PROs over time. Relational coordination facilitated the implementation of patient engagement strategies, but key informants indicated that resources and systems to systematically track treatment preferences and goals beyond clinical indicators were needed to support effective implementation. Conclusions: Adult patients with diabetes and/or CVD of ACO‐affiliated practices with high adoption of patient engagement strategies do not have improved PROs of physical, emotional, and social function over a one‐year time frame. Implementing patient engagement strategies increases task interdependence among primary care team members, which needs to be carefully managed. ACOs may need to make greater investment in collecting, monitoring, and analyzing PRO data to ensure that practice adoption and implementation of patient engagement strategies leads to improved physical, emotional, and social function among patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1468-0009.12400

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [2]2. Muhlestein D, Croshaw A, Merrill T, Pena C. Growth and Dispersion of Accountable Care Organizations: June 2012 Update. Salt Lake City, Utah: Leavitt Partners, 2012. https://www.pacificresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Growth-and-Dispersion-of-ACOs-June-2012-Update.pdf. Accessed May 2019. [Google Scholar]
  2. [7]7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . National Diabetes Fact Sheet, 2011. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  3. [31]31. Gittell JH. Relational Coordination: Guidelines for Theory, Measurement, and Analysis. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  4. [41]41. Nunnelly J, Bernstein I. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw‐Hill; 1994. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
RODRIGUEZ, H. P., POON, B. Y., WANG, E., & SHORTELL, S. M.
Affiliations
  • Center for Healthcare Organizational and Innovation Research University of California Berkeley
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
The Milbank Quarterly
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-06-17
Volume
97
Issue
3
Pages
692-735
ISSN
  • 0887-378X (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-0009
OpenAlex
W2951164133
Cited by
21
References
46
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Milbank Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (IHS‐1310‐06821)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
accountable care organizations, patient engagement, shared decision-making, self-management support, relational coordination, patient-reported outcomes, patient activation, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, primary care practices, implementation, Patient Activation Measure, treatment preferences, health care cost containment, quality incentives, patient-centered care, physical function, care team communication, workflow redesign
MeSH terms
Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Chicago, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Los Angeles, Linear Models, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult, Accountable Care Organizations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review