The Commonwealth Fund Blog

The Care Coordination Imperative: Responding to the Needs of People with Chronic Diseases

February 21, 2012

Tags: health care quality transparency in price and quality patient-centered care

Anne Marie Audet S. PatelBy Anne-Marie J. Audet, M.D, M.Sc., S.M., and Shreya Patel, M.P.H.

The changing landscape of health and disease in the 21st century calls for a concerted response from the health care delivery system. That health care consumes 17 percent of U.S. gross domestic product is alarming, but the change in Americans' health status—one of the underlying drivers of costs—is equally staggering. The increasing prevalence of chronic illness among Americans, even as life expectancy grows and the population ages, poses major challenges to the medical profession and the entire health care system.

Nearly half of all Americans live with at least one chronic condition, and care for these patients is complex, often involving a number of clinical, occupational, and social services. One study found that the typical primary care doctor has the potential to interact with as many as 229 other doctors, in 117 different practices. Another recent study found that the probability that a physician visit would result in a referral to another physician increased from 4.8 percent in 1999 to 9.3 percent in 2009, a 94 percent increase. The absolute number of ambulatory care visits that resulted in a referral more than doubled in this 10-year period.

The latest Commonwealth Fund International Survey examines care coordination, chronic care management, and patient engagement among "sicker" adults in 11 nations . Every country faces particular challenges in caring for the rising number of people with chronic conditions, hence there is a unique opportunity to share and learn from various approaches. In the US, 23 percent of respondents with chronic conditions saw four or more doctors over the last year. Medication management for such patients is particularly complicated; 46 percent of this same group said they were taking four or more prescription drugs on a regular basis.

Not surprising, given this complexity, the survey found problems with care coordination. Patients said that they often experienced problems obtaining medical records and test results, which increased with the number of doctors seen. Thirty percent of U.S. adults with chronic conditions who had four or more doctors reported a coordination problem with test or records, compared with 24 percent of those with one or two doctors.

Coordination is a multifaceted activity that requires effective participation among many different professionals, service organizations, and—of course—the patient. However, even today, the patient is often an afterthought. While there is strong evidence that a key to successful chronic care management is engaging patients in their care, only about half of those with chronic conditions in the U.S.—and in several of the other countries surveyed—say that their regular doctor always tells them about treatment options and involves them in decisions.

Many physician practices may not be set up to serve patients with chronic conditions. Physicians still function as soloists: studies have shown that only 35 percent said that improved teamwork and communication are very effective ways to improve quality of care. And physicians' views of how well they work as part of a team—in terms of communication and collaboration—are much higher than those of the nurses and other team members.

A 2009 survey found that 41 percent of U.S. physicians say their practices function without non-physician staff, such as social workers or nurse case managers, to help manage the care of their patients.

So How Can We Get It Together?
Models of care coordination are not new. The principles of the "medical home" were first proposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1967 for the care of special needs children. The chronic care model has been developed and tested over the past 15 years. So the real challenge is not what to do, but how to do it. It is a question of execution, and even more so of scalability. Organizing the delivery of care to respond to the needs of patients, particularly those with chronic conditions, requires crossing traditional institutional boundaries and creating networks that threaten a health care culture that is currently based on professional and institutional autonomy.

Fortunately, medical education is adapting to the changing landscape. Increasingly young doctors in training are exposed to teamwork both across medical specialties and across health professions, including nursing and pharmacy. Residency training programs, professional organizations, and certifying boards can help ensure that team training is valued as an essential competency.

But the environment in which physicians practice also needs to change to support these care models. The Affordable Care Act provides unique opportunities to organize the delivery system and build a strong primary care practice infrastructure that will help improve care coordination. For example, the law established the Primary Care Extension program, which will be administered by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to provide support to primary care providers. State or multistate hubs and local programs will inform providers about best practices in preventive medicine and chronic disease management, and provide technical assistance to help them implement evidence-based treatment approaches.

A number of training demonstrations will invest in coordinated care teams that include primary care physicians, midlevel providers such as nurse practitioners, and community-based social services providers. Grants and contracts will support medical homes through community health teams, thereby increasing access to coordinated care. Most recently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced the Health Care Innovation Challenge, which provides $1 billion in funding for initiatives that hire, train, and deploy health care workers. That funding is available to physicians, community groups, local government, and other organizations that work with patients with Medicare and Medicaid.

Given these opportunities, how will we know whether we are successful? First, we need to set explicit short- and longer-term targets and monitor progress. For example, what if by 2013—the next time The Commonwealth Fund will survey adults with chronic conditions—we set a target of reducing the number of patients experiencing care coordination problems by 30 percent? And perhaps we can go from 58 percent of patients saying they are engaged in their care to 70 percent in 2013, and 90 percent by 2023. These measures of coordination and engagement could certainly be tracked as new models of care such as medical homes and accountable care organizations are implemented.

The important lessons here are that we need a concerted effort and an overarching strategy to support the changes in the delivery system required to achieve seamless care and the health outcomes we seek. Tracking progress with comparative information and performance benchmarking is essential. In addition, attention needs to be given to strengthening primary care and to developing multidisciplinary teams that can oversee the care of people over time. We need to ensure practices receive technical assistance to help them redesign the way they deliver care. And we need continued investment into health information technology and health information exchange to support care teams, patients, and caregivers. Finally, incentives have to be aligned to remove barriers to implementing efficient models of care, and to reward better quality, better health, and the efficient use of resources.

Post Comment Read or Post Comments

Laura Morris of Palmetto AccessNET says:
March 3, 2012

I agree on the importance of multidisciplinary teams and would like to emphasize that cultural diversity on the team is also very important. Palmetto Project AccessNET participated in the Patient Navigator Outreach and Chronic Disease Prevention Demonstration in a five county area that included rural and urban areas and served an uninsured population that was primarily African American and Hispanic. We found significant cultural differences--both between AAs and Hispanic as well as urban and rural populations--that greatly affected the response to our prevention and education efforts. As an older White woman, I had not really understood that having navigators from the community that had a good understanding of the culture would turn out to be the most significant factor in our success. Using patient navigators (community health workers) drawn from the community should lead to better outcomes at lower cost. Has anyone done any research on this?

Jim Siegel of HealthCare Chaplaincy says:
February 24, 2012

Thank you to the authors for this excellent call for new models in health care delivery to respond to the growing prevalence of chronic illness in the U.S.

This problem – which will only get worse -- is why HealthCare Chaplaincy in New York, a leader in the research, education, and practice of multifaith spiritual care and palliative care, is developing the National Center for Palliative Care Innovation. It will include a 120 unit enhanced assisted living residence for persons with serious, chronic and progressive illness plus a geriatric and palliative care out patient center – the first such program in the U.S. This national demonstration project will develop an innovative, replicable and sustainable model for how best to provide care that is first-rate, integrated and affordable. It will:

1. Demonstrate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of an innovative approach to providing enriched, spirit-centered, late-in-life palliative care to people with serious, chronic, progressive, life-altering
illnesses.

2. Establish and validate the effectiveness of an innovative, multi-modal outpatient “medical
home” practice for providing geriatric and palliative care, which can simultaneously serve as a clinical teaching venue for medical and nursing students pursuing careers in integrative health care, with a special focus on geriatric care, while also serving as a living research laboratory to test the efficacy of a number of clinical protocols and pathways.

3. Locate and integrate residential and outpatient health care in a holistic environment encompassing body, mind, spirit.

4. Develop a research and continuing professional educational venue that will become an
intellectual hub and learning laboratory for health care professionals.

5. Create one of the first research and postgraduate educational centers in the world focused
exclusively on the preparation of chaplains for service in palliative care settings and other
community-based settings that provide spiritual support to individuals and families.

6. Validate that better care and reduced costs at the end of life are not mutually exclusive,
particularly when provided in a supportive residential setting that is focused on identifying and responding to the spiritual (“meaning-making”) needs of individuals.

If you would like to learn more about this model in development, please see this video at http://bit.ly/9vve0H or email me at jsiegel@healthcarechaplaincy.org.

Jim Siegel of HealthCare Chaplaincy says:
February 24, 2012

Thank you to the authors for this excellent call for new models in health care delivery to respond to the growing prevalence of chronic illness in the U.S.

This problem – which will only get worse -- is why HealthCare Chaplaincy in New York, a leader in the research, education, and practice of multifaith spiritual care and palliative care, is developing the National Center for Palliative Care Innovation. It will include a 120 unit enhanced assisted living residence for persons with serious, chronic and progressive illness plus a geriatric and palliative care out patient center – the first such program in the U.S. This national demonstration project will develop an innovative, replicable and sustainable model for how best to provide care that is first-rate, integrated and affordable. It will:

1. Demonstrate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of an innovative approach to providing enriched, spirit-centered, late-in-life palliative care to people with serious, chronic, progressive, life-altering
illnesses.

2. Establish and validate the effectiveness of an innovative, multi-modal outpatient “medical
home” practice for providing geriatric and palliative care, which can simultaneously serve as a clinical teaching venue for medical and nursing students pursuing careers in integrative health care, with a special focus on geriatric care, while also serving as a living research laboratory to test the efficacy of a number of clinical protocols and pathways.

3. Locate and integrate residential and outpatient health care in a holistic environment encompassing body, mind, spirit.

4. Develop a research and continuing professional educational venue that will become an
intellectual hub and learning laboratory for health care professionals.

5. Create one of the first research and postgraduate educational centers in the world focused
exclusively on the preparation of chaplains for service in palliative care settings and other
community-based settings that provide spiritual support to individuals and families.

6. Validate that better care and reduced costs at the end of life are not mutually exclusive,
particularly when provided in a supportive residential setting that is focused on identifying and responding to the spiritual (“meaning-making”) needs of individuals.

If you would like to learn more about this model in development, please see this video at http://bit.ly/9vve0H or email me at jsiegel@healthcarechaplaincy.org.

Laura Morris of Palmetto AccessNET says:
February 23, 2012

Anyone who has been working with people with chronic diseases knows this already. Until there is some reimbursemnt for care coordination, nothing is going to change. Providers do not provide services that are not paid for, and even then it is difficult to get them to value any non-medical services.

Edward Halloran of Queens University of Charlotte says:
February 23, 2012

As a long time nurse, hospital administrator and teacher I am aware of the confusion engendered in the chronically ill by the plethora of physicians, diagnostic tests, and prescriptions provided these individuals. [1] I am also aware of evidence that knowledgeable nurses have provided nursing services designed to reassure, educate and support chronically ill older persons and their families in their homes. These home visits and phone calls have achieved results that have lessened doctor visits, re-hospitalizations and costs while increasing satisfaction with health care. [2] The Affordable Care Act makes provisions for CMS to test community based care transitions. Visiting nurses, in the era before Medicare, were widely available to reassure, educate and support chronically ill older persons and their families in their homes. The Medicare Home Care Benefit reoriented nurses’ home visits towards procedural care that sadly restricts access to a full range of nursing services designed to help people perform the activities that contribute to health, its recovery (or to a peaceful death) they would perform unaided if they had the strength, will or knowledge. [3] Teaching and supporting families out of hospital with nurse visits is more likely to yield the desired effects called for in this posting than are medical homes and other variants of the status quo of low value and high cost. [4]

1. Goodman, DC, Fisher, ES, Chang,C-H (2011) After Hospitalization: A Dartmouth Atlas Report on Post-Acute Care for Medicare Beneficiaries. http://www.dartmouthatlas.org/downloads/reports/Post_discharge_events_092811.pdf
2. Naylor MD, Aiken LH, Kurtzman ET, Olds DM, Hirschman KB. (2011) The care span: The importance of transitional care in achieving health reform. Health Affairs, 30(4):746-54.
3. Henderson, V (1997) The International Council of Nurses’ Basic Principles of Nursing Care. Geneva, CH: ICN.
4. McMahon, LF, Chopra, V (2012) Health care cost and value. JAMA, 307(7):671-2.

FRANK MALETZ MD of CROSSROADS ORTHOPAEDIC GROUP LLC says:
February 23, 2012

Excellent and thank you for your thoughtful scholarship!!!

Your database and comments will enhance substantially my talk at the TORONTO WORLD FUTURE SOCIETY (WFS) this summer. As written, HEALTHSPITAL 4.0, incorporates chronic care integration as one of its five foundational features. Materials related to this RE-VISIONING of the Community Medical Care/Surgical Care Non-system can be accessed at www.healthospital.org. I enthusiastically invite your review and critique.

Again your work is acknowledged and highly regarded.

Sharon Heskitt of Rochester College says:
February 23, 2012

To further expand on the comment regarding accessible and affordable housing, if in addition to addressing housing, how about addressing accessible, affordable nutrition? Actual fruits and vegetables that promote health and healing within the body? Adequate, affordable, safe housing and nutritious food are two key pieces to a healthy body.

Sharon Heskitt of Rochester College says:
February 23, 2012

Yes, The key is developing multidisciplinary teams and in these teams there is the acknowledgement that all have an important piece of the care to provide. This includes the patient and their family. There is no room for egos.

Incentives? Why are incentives needed to remove barriers to implementing efficient models of care as noted in the final paragraph? Who or what are the barriers? It would seem that the freedom to practice within the fullest extent of the various team members' scopes of practice and provide competent and timely preventive care in the home would be incentive enough.

Dina Elani of HUD says:
February 23, 2012

I think this article is right on target.
Have worked in LTC delivery for over 20 years -- health care provider level, state level, federal level, etc.

How about the issue of having accessible and affordable housing for lower income persons with chronic care decisions, as part of the "cross over"?