Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 25, Issue 6, pp 630–634 | Cite as

Good Neighbors: How Will the Patient-Centered Medical Home Relate to the Rest of the Health-Care Delivery System?

Clinical Review

Abstract

Recent policy focus on models of the patient-centered medical home raises questions about how medical home practices will relate to the rest of the health-care delivery system. This paper presents a conceptual framework of how patients and clinicians might interact in a medical neighborhood; outlines key features of a neighborhood and incentives for medical neighbors to participate in care coordination; identifies the policy considerations in designing neighborhoods; and puts forth a research agenda to support the development and evaluation of medical neighborhoods.

References

  1. 1.
    Johnson RL, et al. Final report of the FOPE II Education of the Pediatrician Workgroup. Pediatrics. 2000;106(5):1175–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barr M, Ginsburg J. The advanced medical home: a patient-centered physician-guided model of health care. Philadelphia: American Coll of Physicians. 2008. Available at: www.acponline.org/running_practice/pcmh.
  3. 3.
    Pham HH, O’Malley AS, Bach PB, Wu B, Schrag D. Primary care physicians’ links to other physicians through their medicare patients: the scope of care coordination. Annals of Internal Medicine.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Trude S. So much to do, so little time: Physician capacity constraints, 1997–2001. Center for Studying Health System Change, Tracking Report No. 8. Washington, DC, May 2003.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ginsburg PB and Grossman JM. When the price isn’t right: How inadvertent payment incentives drive medical care. Health Affairs (Millwood). 2005 Jul–Dec;Suppl Web Exclusives:W5-376-84.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Starfield B. Primary care: balancing health needs, services and technology. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Molla S et al., eds. Primary care: america’s health in a new era. committee on the future of primary care. Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press. Washington, DC; 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tamuz M, Harrison MI. Improving patient safety in hospitals: Contributions of high-reliability theory and normal accident theory. Health Serv Res. 2006;41(4 Pt 2):1654–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    111th U.S. Congress. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. H.R.1., S.1., Washington, D.C.; 2009.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    O’Malley AS et al. Use of electronic medical records for coordination of care by physician practices. Forthcoming in JGIM.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    U.S. House of Representatives. America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. H.R. 3200. Washington, DC, July 14, 2009.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tynan A, Draper DA. Getting what we pay for: Innovations lacking in provider payment reform for chronic disease care. Center for Studying Health System Change. Research Brief No. 6. Washington, DC, June 2008.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peikes D, Pham HH, O’Malley AS, Scholle S, Torda P, Shapiro R, Maxfield MM. Design of the CMS medical home demonstration. Report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore MD, June 2008.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Studying Health System ChangeWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations