The National Dementia Workforce Study: The Plan for Organization Sample Frames and Data Collection

Regulation of assisted reproductive technologies in the United States

After Childbirth: Better Data Can Help Align Postpartum Needs with a New Standard of Care.

Regionalization, systems of care design, and quality improvement (QI) registry participation all promote the widespread dissemination of guideline-based evidence into actual practice. As a result, policy statements from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA) advocate for the creation of regional systems of care for various time-critical diagnoses, including ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation, and acute stroke.1–3 Creation of these regional networks requires multidisciplinary collaboration to implement 5 mutually reinforcing core elements4 that build each system: (1) Designation of certain hospitals with special treatment capabilities as Receiving Centers for STEMI, resuscitation, or stroke; (2) emergency medical services (EMS) destination protocols that allow for direct transport of certain patients identified by explicit triage criteria to a designated Receiving Center, thus allowing for bypass of closer hospitals if they lack the needed specialty service; (3) organized interhospital transfer and transport protocols to a Receiving Center for appropriate patients who initially self-present or are mistriaged to a Referral Hospital; (4) communication or telemedicine options to provide real-time expert consultation as needed from a Receiving Center to its associated Referral Hospitals or EMS providers; and (5) participation in a regional and/or national QI registry to track relevant process-of-care metrics and meaningful risk-adjusted clinical outcomes. Within each of the 50 states, unique challenges exist for stakeholders attempting to implement the 5 aforementioned core elements of regional or statewide systems of care. In particular, substantial variation exists with regard to the starting point for these initiatives. For example, some states already have sufficient regulatory authority within their EMS agency or state department of health (DOH) to regionalize care of time-critical diagnoses, whereas other states require new legislation to create coordinated systems. In October 2011, the Advocacy Coordinating Committee of the AHA convened a multispecialty task force to assess the …

Improving women's health and perinatal health outcomes is a high priority for Medicaid, the jointly financed federal-state health coverage program. The authorities provided by the Affordable Care Act give Medicaid new resources and opportunities to improve coverage and perinatal care. Given that the Medicaid program currently covers almost half of all births in the United States, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in partnership with states and other stakeholders, is using new and existing authorities to improve birth outcomes. Quality measurement, quality-improvement projects, and expanded models of care underscore the major quality approach of the center. As an outgrowth of an expert panel that included membership of several state Medicaid medical directors, Medicaid providers, and consumer representatives, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services launched the Maternal and Infant Health Initiative, which aims to increase postpartum visit rates and the use of effective contraception among women covered by Medicaid. This Initiative provides focus on key opportunities and strategies to improve the rate, measurement, timing, and content of postpartum visits. Additionally, a focus on contraception will serve to improve pregnancy planning and spacing and prevent unintended pregnancy. As the Initiative evolves, the Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services plans to identify policy, service delivery, and reimbursement policies to advance the Initiative's goals and improve outcomes for women covered by Medicaid.

Economic Grand Rounds: A Pay-for-Performance Program for Behavioral Health Care Practitioners

Family Physicians Sue to Shine Light on RUC Deliberations, Claim Specialists Skew Reimbursement Against Primary Care

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and state health agencies implemented numerous regulations for nursing homes addressing infection control and data reporting. This study explores interviews (n = 156) with administrators of 40 nursing homes across the U.S. between July 2020 and December 2021 to better understand their experiences with governmental agencies amid shifting regulatory standards, frequent inspections, and possible enforcement actions. Administrators highlighted confusion due to the evolving and sometimes conflicting guidance between state and federal agencies, although some states offered valuable COVID-19-specific assistance. They also described challenges in understanding and implementing new, frequently changing requirements, resulting in potential inspection deficiencies. Although enforcement actions, including financial penalties, are intended to deter noncompliance, administrators expressed concerns about added resource strain. Recommendations included increasing collaboration and data collection between regulatory agencies; reducing administrative burden during outbreaks and incorporating feedback from centers during regulatory changes; and increasing reimbursement to support compliance. Continued changes to oversight, including increased penalization and risk-based survey prioritization, should be evaluated to determine differential impacts on nursing home operations and resident care.

American Association of Heart Failure Nurses’ mission, vision, and strategic plan: What do these mean to me—the member?

Republicans Push for Malpractice Reform

Here Comes the Sun: Medical Professionalism and the Implications of the Sunshine Act for Gastroenterology Practice

Duration of positive airway pressure adherence: how much PAP is enough?

In this issue of Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes , Xu et al present findings from a search of US patents related to bare-metal coronary stents in an effort to gain insight on how medical device innovation starts and how policies in the United States might help to promote more innovation.1 Of the 245 patents identified by their search strategy for the years 1984 to 1994, the authors report that the most frequently cited stent patents (their measure of patent importance to innovation headlined by the Palmaz and Gianturco patents) were from individual physician inventors working in academic medical centers and their small private companies. They also report a temporal trend that shows, in later years, more patents were granted to public companies. They concluded that policies aimed at supporting these entities might enhance and accelerate innovation because early innovation, in this case, was spurred by individual inventors with their small companies. Article see p 743 It is true that individual practitioners struggling with the challenges of everyday practice are an important source of new-device concepts that can possibly solve an unmet clinical need. However, the journey of successful innovation to maximized impact on public health requires that these early ideas (such as the original stiff, boxcar like tubular stent of Palmaz or the poorly scaffolding clam shell stent of Gianturco) need significant refinement through subsequent innovation (such as the later, industry-based Lau patent of the Multilink stent that …

This paper describes the background, methodology, data collection, and analytical plan of a pilot investigation conducted under contract for the National Center for Health Statistics during 1975. The objective was to determine the cost effectiveness of a variety of strategies under consideration for national application to develop previously unavailable information on utilization of, and the costs and payments for, health care. Detailed data on health care utilization and expenditures were collected periodically from a panel of 691 Maryland households over a six-month interval. Issues to be tested through a random experimental design include whether periodicity (monthly vs bimonthly interviews) and type of contact (in-person vs telephone) are significant factors in the cost effectiveness of this type of survey. An extensive record check involving all providers and third-party payers identified in the household survey was carried out. Record information will be used to 1) provide a basis for measuring accuracy of household data, 2) fill gaps in household knowledge, and 3) determine whether a subset of the record sources can provide adequate information for correcting household data. The household survey resulted in an initial response rate of 77.5 per cent with a subsequent attrition rate over six months of 13.6 per cent. Signed permission to access record data was obtained for 84.9 per cent of the individuals completing the entire survey. The most intensive survey strategy, monthly, mostly in-person contact, resulted in the lowest participation. The analytical plan presents details of the approaches to be taken in making judgments on the relative accuracy and completeness of data obtained by the various survey strategies and the contribution made by availability of data from record sources.

Variation in Waitlisting Rates at the Dialysis Facility Level in the Context of Goals for Improving Kidney Health in the United States

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Models to Improve Late-stage Chronic Kidney Disease and End-stage Renal Disease Care: Leveraging Nephrology Payment Policy to Achieve Value.