Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 26, Issue 12, pp 1418–1425 | Cite as

Development of a Safety Net Medical Home Scale for Clinics

  • Jonathan M. Birnberg
  • Melinda L. Drum
  • Elbert S. Huang
  • Lawrence P. Casalino
  • Sarah E. Lewis
  • Anusha M. Vable
  • Hui Tang
  • Michael T. Quinn
  • Deborah L. Burnet
  • Thomas Summerfelt
  • Marshall H. Chin
Original Research

Abstract

Background

Existing tools to measure patient-centered medical home (PCMH) adoption are not designed for research evaluation in safety-net clinics.

Objective

Develop a scale to measure PCMH adoption in safety-net clinics.

Research Design

Cross-sectional survey.

Subjects

Sixty-five clinics in five states.

Main Measures

Fifty-two-item Safety Net Medical Home Scale (SNMHS). The total score ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) and is an average of multiple subscales (0–100): Access and Communication, Patient Tracking and Registry, Care Management, Test and Referral Tracking, Quality Improvement, and External Coordination. The scale was tested for internal consistency reliability and tested for convergent validity using The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (ACIC) and the Patient-Centered Medical Home Assessment (PCMH-A). The scale was applied to centers in the sample. In addition, linear regression models were used to measure the association between clinic characteristics and medical home adoption.

Results

The SNMHS had high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84). The SNMHS score correlated moderately with the ACIC score (r = 0.64, p < 0.0001) and the PCMH-A (r = 0.56, p < 0.001). The mean SNMHS score was 61 ± SD 13. Among the subscales, External Coordination (66 ± 16) and Access and Communication (65 ± 14) had the highest mean scores, while Quality Improvement (55 ± 17) and Care Management (55 ± 16) had lower mean scores. Clinic characteristics positively associated with total SNMHS score were having more providers (β 15.8 95% CI 8.1–23.4 >8 provider FTEs compared to <4 FTEs) and participation in financial incentive programs (β 8.4 95% 1.6–15.3).

Conclusion

The SNMHS demonstrated reliability and convergent validity for measuring PCMH adoption in safety-net clinics. Some clinics have significant PCMH adoption. However, room for improvement exists in most domains, especially for clinics with fewer providers.

KEY WORDS

medical home community health center access to care quality of care 

Supplementary material

11606_2011_1767_MOESM1_ESM.doc (92 kb)
ESM 1(DOC 92kb)

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Rosenthal TC. The medical home: growing evidence to support a new approach to primary care. J Am Board Fam Med. 2008;21(5):427–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    HRSA. 2009 National Total Summary Data. http://bphc.hrsa.gov/healthcenterdatastatistics/nationaldata/2009/2009nattotsumdata.html. Accessed June 5, 2011.
  3. 3.
    Adashi EY, Geiger HJ, Fine MD. Health care reform and primary care–the growing importance of the community health center. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(22):2047–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Federally Qualified Health Center Advanced Primary Care Practice Demonstration. http://www.cms.gov/demoprojectsevalrpts/md/itemdetail.asp?itemid=CMS1230557. Accessed June 5, 2011.
  5. 5.
    Reid RJ, Fishman PA, Yu O, et al. Patient-centered medical home demonstration: a prospective, quasi-experimental, before and after evaluation. Am J Manag Care. 2009;15(9):e71–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nutting PA, Crabtree BF, Stewart EE, et al. Effect of facilitation on practice outcomes in the National Demonstration Project model of the patient-centered medical home. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8(Suppl 1):S33–44. S92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stange KC, Nutting PA, Miller WL, et al. Defining and measuring the patient-centered medical home. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(6):601–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berenson RA, Hammons T, Gans DN, et al. A house is not a home: keeping patients at the center of practice redesign. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(5):1219–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Flottemesch TJ, Fontaine P, Asche SE, Solberg LI. Relationship of clinic medical home scores to health care costs. J Ambul Care Manage. 2011;34(1):78–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Solberg LI, Asche SE, Fontaine P, Flottemesch TJ, Pawlson LG, Scholle SH. Relationship of clinic medical home scores to quality and patient experience. J Ambul Care Manage. 2011;34(1):57–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    National Committee for Quality Assurance Physician Practice Connection-Research. Obtained by e-mail from Sarah Scholle PhD 3/9/2011.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Doty M, Abrams M, Hernandez S, Stemikis K, Beal A. Enhancing the capacity of community health centers to achieve high performance: findings from the 2009 Commonwealth Fund National Survey of Federally Qualified Health Centers May 27, 2010.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Coleman K, Phillips K. Providing underserved patients with medical homes: assessing the readiness of safety-net health centers. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2010;85:1.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Calvo A, Rainsford B, Bezold C. Comprehensive Health Homes: Using the Expanded Care Model of the HRSA Health Disparities Collaboratives. Am J Public Health. In pressGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    The Safety Net Medical Home Initiative. http://www.qhmedicalhome.org/safety-net/index.cfm.
  17. 17.
    Change Concepts for Practice Transformation. Accessed June 5, 2011. http://www.qhmedicalhome.org/safety-net/change-concepts.cfm.
  18. 18.
    National Qualty ForumTM-Endorsed Definition And Framework For Measuring Care Coordination 2006.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    DesRoches CM, Campbell EG, Rao SR, et al. Electronic health records in ambulatory care–a national survey of physicians. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(1):50–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shields AE, Shin P, Leu MG, et al. Adoption of health information technology in community health centers: results of a national survey. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26(5):1373–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    The Commonwealth Fund 2009 Survey of Health Clinics Involved in the Safety Net Medical Home Initiative. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Innovations/Tools/2011/~/media/Files/Innovations/CMWF_SurveyFinal722.pdf.
  22. 22.
    National Committee for Quality Assurance: Physician Practice Connections-Patient-Centered Medical Home Standard and Guidelines. Washington, DC. 2008.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    National Committee for Quality Assurance: Standards for the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) 2011. http://www.ncqa.org/Portals/0/Programs/Recognition/2011PCMHbrochure_web.pdf.
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    Sidorov JE. The patient-centered medical home for chronic illness: is it ready for prime time? Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(5):1231–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bonomi AE, Wagner EH, Glasgow RE, VonKorff M. Assessment of chronic illness care (ACIC): a practical tool to measure quality improvement. Health Serv Res. 2002;37(3):791–820.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cook NL, Hicks LS, O'Malley AJ, Keegan T, Guadagnoli E, Landon BE. Access to specialty care and medical services in community health centers. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26(5):1459–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    HRSA. Health Resources and Services Administration: Health Center Program. http://bphc.hrsa.gov/about/. Accessed June 5, 2011.
  29. 29.
    Doty M, Abrams M, Hernandez S, Stemikis K, Beal A. Enhancing the capacity of community health centers to achieve high performance: findings from the 2009 Commonwealth Fund National Survey of Federally Qualified Health Centers May 27, 2010 2010.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Friedberg MW, Coltin KL, Safran DG, Dresser M, Schneider EC. Medical home capabilities of primary care practices that serve sociodemographically vulnerable neighborhoods. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(11):938–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rittenhouse DR, Casalino LP, Gillies RR, Shortell SM, Lau B. Measuring the medical home infrastructure in large medical groups. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(5):1246–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Friedberg MW, Safran DG, Coltin KL, Dresser M, Schneider EC. Readiness for the Patient-Centered Medical Home: structural capabilities of Massachusetts primary care practices. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24(2):162–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goldberg DG, Kuzel AJ. Elements of the patient-centered medical home in family practices in Virginia. Ann Fam Med. 2009;7(4):301–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ferrante JM, Balasuramanian BA, Hudson SV, Crabtree BF. Principles of the patient-centered medical home and preventive services delivery. Ann Fam Med. 2010;8(2):108–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Abrams M, Schor EL, Schoenbaum S. How physician practices could share personnel and resources to support medical homes. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(6):1194–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Landon BE, Gill JM, Antonelli RC, Rich EC. Using evidence to inform policy: developing a policy-relevant research agenda for the patient-centered medical home. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(6):581–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rittenhouse DR, Thom DH, Schmittdiel JA. Developing a policy-relevant research agenda for the patient-centered medical home: a focus on outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(6):593–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan M. Birnberg
    • 1
  • Melinda L. Drum
    • 2
  • Elbert S. Huang
    • 1
  • Lawrence P. Casalino
    • 3
  • Sarah E. Lewis
    • 1
  • Anusha M. Vable
    • 1
  • Hui Tang
    • 1
  • Michael T. Quinn
    • 1
  • Deborah L. Burnet
    • 1
  • Thomas Summerfelt
    • 4
  • Marshall H. Chin
    • 1
  1. 1.Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of MedicineUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health StudiesUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  3. 3.Weill Cornell Medical CollegeNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.Advocate Health Care SystemOak BrookUSA

Personalised recommendations