automated use of clinical laboratory results

Post on 17-Jun-2015

2.013 Views

Category:

Economy & Finance

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

These slides are from the Dartmouth Jones Lecture of May 2008 by Benjamin Littenberg. They describe the development and evaluation of the Vermedx Diabetes Information System

TRANSCRIPT

Automated Use of Clinical Laboratory Results in Adults

Benjamin Littenberg, MDUniversity of Vermont

andVermont Clinical Decision Support, LLC

Disclosure

I have an equity position in Vermont Clinical Decision Support, LLC, (Vermedx) along with The University of Vermont and other

faculty inventors.

www.Vermedx.com

Agenda

• Two problems in diabetes– Quality of individual care– Public health impact

• A novel strategy for using information

• Clinical and public health impacts

• Economic impact

Problem Characteristics

• Lab results are central to diabetes management– Good consensus on at least some aspects of care

• Keeping track of results is difficult– Doctors love flow sheets – but hate to keep them up!– Patients use many different laboratories

• Interpreting results is difficult– Diabetes is among the most complex problems a primary care

provider faces• Patients get “lost to follow-up”

– No reminder systems• Doctors and nurses care for individual patients

– Nobody has a “population view”

Guidelines• Hemoglobin A1C measures average blood sugar over last 6-8 weeks

– Low: <7.0%; Medium 7-9%; High: >9%– Frequency: 3 months if high or medium; 6 months if low

• LDL-Cholesterol measures “bad cholesterol” and vascular disease risk– Low: <100 mg/dl; Medium: 100-130; High >130– Frequency: 3 months if high; 6 months if medium; 12 months if low

• Creatinine measures current kidney function– High depends on age and sex (and race and size and....)– Frequency: annual

• Urine protein ratio measures risk for future kidney failure– Low: <30; Medium: 30-300; High: >300– Frequency: 12 months if low; never again if high or 2 mediums or if on

certain medications

And that’s just (some) of the lab tests!

Registry Approach

• Integrate data from multiple sources– Multiple laboratories

• Feedback to providers about individual patients with “value-added reports”

• Feedback to patients• Aggregate to population level

It works for infections. Why not diabetes?

Design Criteria

• Low cost per case• Low technology investment at the practice

– With or without electronic medical record

• Little change in practice flow• Little disruption of patient-provider

relationship• Accommodate multiple data sources• High face validity (accuracy)

Vermedx Diabetes Information System (VDIS)

• Automatic reports to providers and patients

• Based on clinical laboratory results

• Daily feeds from clinical labs

• Electronic messages or faxes to providers (doctors, nurses, physician assistants)

• Letters to patients

VDIS Architecture

VDIS Computer

Primary Care

Provider

Patient

ClinicalLab

ClinicalLab

Electronic medical record

or fax

MailSecure Network

Public HealthSurveillance

VDIS Clinical Outreach

• Flow sheet updates after every lab result

• Reminders to providers

• Reminder letters to patients

• Clinical alert letters to patients

• Quarterly population reports to providers

All products based on national guidelines

Flow sheet

• A flow sheet of pertinent labs, with decision support recommendations

– sent to provider whenever a pertinent test is done

– use in the visit to decide what to do

– follow trends– decide when to re-test– remember odd testing

intervals– possible handout for the

patient

Patient Reminder

• Letter from provider with practice address and telephone

– Explains which tests are due and when

– Asks patient to call office to set up testing

– Motivates patients to stay involved

– Reminds them that the practice cares about their long-term health

– Sent 30 days after the test is overdue (grace period)

Provider Reminder

• A reminder to the practice when patient is overdue

– Use this to keep patients from getting lost to follow up

– Sent 30 days after the test is overdue (grace period)

Patient Alert

• Letter from provider alerting patient to abnormal results

– Sent only for high results (A1C>8 or LDL>130)

– Asks patient to call provider’s office to set up further care (if they haven’t already)

Population Report

– Lists provider’s roster of diabetes patients, their most recent result and overdue status

• Makes it easy to find lost or out-of-control patients for quality improvement

– Provides “report card” for the practice, compared to all other providers and the top 10% performance

– Delivered every 3 months by mail

– Confidential – not shared with anyone else!

• VDIS is not recommended as a “Pay for Performance” system

Clinical Impact: The VDIS Trial

• Randomized by practice• Active practices get all 5 products• Control practices get none• 32 months• Outcomes:

– On-time testing– Blood sugar (A1C), Cholesterol– Costs

• Supported by NIH (R01 DK61167)

Participants

• 64 General Internal Medicine or Family Practices

• 128 Primary Care Providers– MD, DO, NP, PA

• 7,412 adults with diabetes confirmed by provider

• 1,006 randomly selected for home survey

1.17

1.39 1.40

1.74

11.

52

2.5

3O

dds

Ra

tio a

nd

95%

CI

A1C Cholesterol Creatinine Urine Protein

Adjusted for baseline testing and clustering n = 7,412On time testing

Other patient outcomes

• No change in– A1C levels– Cholesterol levels– Renal function– Blood pressure– Functional status– Body mass index

• Improvement in self-care (exercise)

Health Care UtilizationOutcome Control Intervention

AdjustedEffect* P

Hospital days/y 1.89 1.18 -1.01 0.047

Emergency room visits/y

0.72 0.55 -0.23 0.020

Primary care visits/y 2.86 2.04 -0.81 0.010

Specialty visits/y 0.23 0.15 -0.08 0.044

Costs $/y $4937 $3202 -$2426 0.033

*Linear regression adjusted for age, sex, marital status, education, health literacy, race, insulin use, comorbidity, hospital, and clustering within practices.

Health Care UtilizationOutcome Control Intervention

AdjustedEffect* P

Hospital days/y 1.89 1.18 -1.01 0.047

Emergency room visits/y

0.72 0.55 -0.23 0.020

Primary care visits/y 2.86 2.04 -0.81 0.010

Specialty visits/y 0.23 0.15 -0.08 0.044

Costs $/y $4937 $3202 -$2426 0.033

*Linear regression adjusted for age, sex, marital status, education, health literacy, race, insulin use, comorbidity, hospital, and clustering within practices.

The VDIS registry with patient outreach saves over $2,400 per patient per year.

Study Conclusions

• A registry-based clinical outreach program in primary care:– is feasible– improves diabetes care– saves money

What about using it for Public Health?

Registries in Public Health

• Inexpensive surveillance data

• Population view

• Analytic uses

• Clinical outreach (sometimes)

Laboratory results fit the bill.

What can a registry do for public health surveillance?

• Current overall status • Outcomes in subgroups

– Age, sex, geography, provider

• Trends over time• Maps• Combination with other data sources

– Census, surveys, hospital discharges, claims

Data for policy, persuasion and programs

80

10

01

20

14

0M

ea

n L

DL

-Ch

ole

ste

rol (

mg

/dl)

0 20 40 60 80 100Percent of Practices

71 practices 7,512 patients 105.8 patients/practice

Cholesterol by Practice

46

81

0A

1C (

%)

A B C D E F G H I J K LHospital Service Area

Blood Sugar Control by Hospital Service Area

6.50

6.75

7.00

7.25

7.50

7.75

Mea

n A

1C

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Monthly Averages

Linear Fit

A1C is falling by 0.036% per year (P<0.001)A1C over Time

6.50

6.75

7.00

7.25

7.50

7.75

Mea

n A

1C (

%)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Vermont

New York

VT: -0.068 per year NY: +0.003 per year (P<0.05)Population Trend: A1C over Time

Clinton, NY

Franklin, NYSt. Lawrence, NY

Grafton, NH

CaledoniaChittenden

EssexFranklin

Gra

nd I

sle

Lamoille

Orange

Orleans

Rutland

Washington

Windham

Addison

Ben

ning

ton

Windsor

Red = High (P<0.05)

Blue = Low (P<0.05)

Grey = Non-outlier

White = No data

Glycemic Control by County

Clinton, NY

Franklin, NYSt. Lawrence, NY

Grafton, NH

CaledoniaChittenden

EssexFranklin

Gra

nd I

sle

Lamoille

Orange

Orleans

Rutland

Washington

Windham

Addison

Ben

ning

ton

Windsor

Red = High (P<0.05)

Blue = Low (P<0.05)

Grey = Non-outlier

White = No data

Glycemic Control by County

Current Vermedx RegistriesVermont New York City San Antonio

Started 2002 2006 May 2008

Sponsor Integrated provider group, insurer

Health Department

Health Department

Patients ~3,000 ~600,000 ~210,000?

Scope A1C, lipids, renal A1C only A1C only

Outreach Yes Pilot phase No

Surveillance No Yes Yes

Patient consent Opt-out None None

Benefits of Population-Based Decision Support

• Improved clinical outcomes for patients

• Help with management of chronic illness for physicians

• Cost savings for the health care system

• Improvement in Public Health

Thanks!

Benjamin Littenberg, MD

Benjamin.Littenberg@vtmednet.org

802-847-8268

www.Vermedx.com

top related