PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P A Glassman

Publications and source records attributed to P A Glassman.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Physician perceptions of a national formulary.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the perceptions of US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) physicians regarding effects of a National Formulary (NF) on patient care, access to drugs, physician workload, and resident training approximately 1 year after it was implemented. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to attending physicians working within the VA healthcare system. Participants included general internists (n = 2824), neurologists (n = 238), psychiatrists (n = 997), general surgeons (n = 429), and urologists (n = 152). The response rate was 45%. RESULTS: Most physicians (63%) thought that they could prescribe needed drugs; 65% agreed that patients could obtain needed nonformulary drugs. One third disagreed that access to prescription pharmaceuticals had increased; 29% stated the NF impinged on providing quality care to their own patients, and 21% thought it did so to patients from other VA facilities. Thirty eight percent of physicians perceived the NF to be more restrictive than private sector formularies; 16% thought that the NF diminished the ability to train residents for managed care. Forty percent thought that the NF added to workload. Generalists more often perceived that the NF improved their ability to provide care compared with neurologists (27% vs 18%, P = .046), psychiatrists (27% vs 22%, P = .027), and internal medicine subspecialists (27% vs 18%, P = .001). Physicians with more clinic time were more likely to perceive that the NF increased workload. CONCLUSION: Although differences of opinions among physicians were noted, most responding VA physicians did not perceive that the NF adversely affected patient care, access to pharmaceuticals, physician workload, or resident training.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2001

Cost-sharing for prescriptions of sildenafil and finasteride: a case study in veteran patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patients willingness to share the costs of 2 medications (often described as "lifestyle medications"): sildenafil for erectile dysfunction and finasteride for hair loss, which are not routinely covered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. STUDY DESIGN: Self-administered, anonymous survey. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult men (n = 339) were recruited from waiting rooms for primary care or erectile dysfunction clinic appointments at 2 Los Angeles VA facilities. RESULTS: Participants with self-reported need were analyzed separately for finasteride (primary care patients only) and sildenafil (both primary care and erectile dysfunction clinic patients). The mean age of the participants was 56 and 60 years for the finasteride and sildenafil groups, respectively. Mean annual household income for both groups was under $10,000. Respondents reported a mean willingness to cost-share $4.20 for a 30-day prescription of daily finasteride (VA wholesale cost = $27) and $5.40 for 4 sildenafil pills (VA wholesale cost = $20). In the multivariate analysis, higher income (P = .002) and increasing self-reported need for medication (P = .04) were associated with increased willingness to cost-share for finasteride after controlling for age, race/ethnicity, insured status, comorbid conditions, and type of clinic. In addition, younger age (P = .01) was associated with greater willingness to cost-share for sildenafil. CONCLUSIONS: In this low-income veteran population, patients with a self-reported need for sildenafil and finasteride would be willing to make a higher copayment than the current VA maximum copayment of $2.00 per 30-day prescription, if these medicines were made available.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Using standardized patients to measure quality: evidence from the literature and a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Use of standardized patients for evaluating the clinical skills of medical students and medical trainees is commonplace. This has encouraged the use of standardized patients to evaluate the quality of physician practice in outpatient settings. However, there may be substantive differences between observing student performance and evaluating whether the provision of care meets defined quality criteria. OBJECTIVES: This study had two primary objectives: (1) to review studies that use standardized patients to evaluate physician performance and (2) to ascertain directly whether standardized patients could be useful in assessing quality of outpatient care. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review of studies that used standardized patients to assess physician performance was conducted. A prospective study that included 20 physicians at two outpatient settings and 27 actor patients assessed quality of care using eight clinical cases divided into five clinical domains, each of which had explicit criteria checklists based on widely accepted guidelines. RESULTS: The literature review identified five important issues: developing scenarios, selecting explicit criteria, standardizing standardized patient training, creating subterfuges, and ensuring reliability and validity of measures. In the study, trained standardized patients were able to assess physician practice accurately for common medical conditions, using proven criteria linked to health outcomes. The detection rate was 3%. There was no performance variation between actors for seven of the eight cases. CONCLUSIONS: Using standardized patients to measure the quality of care is practical and feasible. The major methodological challenge is incorporating observable evidence-based criteria into realistic scripts and objective checklists. The major logistical challenge is obtaining and maintaining undetected entry into physicians' offices.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1999

Improving pneumococcal vaccine rates. Nurse protocols versus clinical reminders.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of three interventions designed to improve the pneumococcal vaccination rate. DESIGN: A prospective controlled trial. SETTING: Department of Veterans Affairs ambulatory care clinic. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: There were 3, 502 outpatients with scheduled visits divided into three clinic teams (A, B, or C). INTERVENTIONS: During a 12-week period, each clinic team received one intervention: (A) nurse standing orders with comparative feedback as well as patient and clinician reminders; (B) nurse standing orders with compliance reminders as well as patient and clinician reminders; and (C) patient and clinician reminders alone. Team A nurses (comparative feedback group) received information on their vaccine rates relative to those of team B nurses. Team B nurses (compliance reminders group) received reminders to vaccinate but no information on vaccine rates. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Team A nurses assessed more patients than team B nurses (39% vs 34%, p =.009). However, vaccination rates per total patient population were similar (22% vs 25%, p =.09). The vaccination rates for both team A and team B were significantly higher than the 5% vaccination rate for team C (p <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-initiated vaccine protocols raised vaccination rates substantially more than a physician and patient reminder system. The nurse-initiated protocol with comparative feedback modestly improved the assessment rate compared with the protocol with compliance reminders, but overall vaccination rates were similar.

Ambulatory Care Facilities↗
PubMed1999

Pharmaceutical advertising revenue and physician organizations: how much is too much?

OBJECTIVE: To determine if revenue generated from pharmaceutical advertisements in medical journals creates potential financial conflicts of interest for nonprofit physician organizations that own those journals. DESIGN: Convenience sample of six professional medical societies and their respective journals. Calculation of pharmaceutical advertising revenue generated by these journals for their respective professional medical societies. METHODS: Random selection of each journal for one month per quarter in calendar year 1996 and tabulation per edition of the average number of pharmaceutical advertising pages for each journal. OUTCOME MEASURES: Published advertising rates were used to estimate pharmaceutical advertising revenue for calendar year 1996 and compared with each organization's gross revenue and membership dues and assessments, based on Internal Revenue Service documents for the last available fiscal year (1995). RESULTS: Estimated pharmaceutical advertising revenue ranged from $715,000 to $18,630,000. Five organizations raised more than 10% of their gross income (range 2% to 30%) from a single journal's pharmaceutical advertising. Four organizations raised as much or more from pharmaceutical advertising as from members (range 17% to 790%). CONCLUSIONS: Potential financial conflicts of interest arising from pharmaceutical advertisements in medical journals may be substantial. The impact on professional societies' financial independence and behavior is unknown.

Advertising↗
PubMed1998

Physician and dietitian prescribing of a commercially available oral nutritional supplement.

We examined whether a policy change transferring prescribing privileges for oral nutritional supplements to dietitians resulted in fewer inappropriate outpatient prescriptions. This was a pre/post study design using a retrospective review of physician and dietitian prescribing for ambulatory patients during two separate time periods: physician prescribing, October to December, 1994; dietitian prescribing, April to June, 1995. Inappropriate prescriptions during each period were defined as those given to patients with normal nutritional status or with a contraindication to a high-energy, electrolyte-containing solution. The study was conducted in outpatient clinics at a Veterans Affairs teaching hospital. We found that dietitians gave fewer prescriptions to outpatients who were not malnourished or to outpatients who had a contraindication to receiving a supplement (11% vs 34%; P = 0.002). In addition, dietitians more often completed relevant laboratory assessments (75% vs 43%; P = 0.001) and more frequently arranged follow-up dietetic evaluations (84% vs 30%, P < 0.001) for ambulatory patients receiving supplements. We conclude that transferring nutritional supplement prescribing privileges to dietitians led to fewer inappropriate outpatient prescriptions and to more comprehensive nutritional assessments, as measured by relevant laboratory use and dietetic follow-up. Physicians more frequently prescribed supplements to outpatients who were not malnourished or who had contraindications to receiving supplements. Our results suggest that physicians would benefit from assistance with and/or education concerning oral nutritional supplements.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1997

Differences in clinical decision making between internists and cardiologists.

BACKGROUND: Whether cardiologists or internists use discretionary tests differently for noncritical cardiological presentation is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To explore differences in decision making for 3 common scenarios. METHODS: We asked 318 cardiologists and 598 internists to manage scenario patients presenting with (1) uncomplicated syncope, (2) nonanginal chest pain, and (3) nonspecific electrocardiographic changes. Participants also estimated baseline clinical risk for each scenario and answered questions on uncertainty, malpractice concerns, and cost consciousness. We used chi 2 analysis, analysis of variance, and t tests to compare management choice and test ordering. Response rate was 50%. RESULTS: Initial management choices (ie, admit or discharge, allow or delay surgery) were similar but subsequent testing differed substantially. For a 50-year-old woman with uncomplicated syncope, cardiologists more often recommended cardiological tests such as exercise treadmill tests (37% vs 18%, 95% confidence interval [CI] for difference: 10%-28%) and signal-averaged electrocardiograms (13% vs 4%, 95% CI for difference: 3%-15%) but less often requested neurological tests (29% vs 37%, 95% CI for difference: -17% to 1%). For a 42-year-old man with nonanginal chest pain, cardiologists more frequently ordered exercise tests (70% vs 51%, 95% CI for difference: 10%-28%). For a 53-year-old woman with nonspecific electrocardiographic changes, equal proportions of cardiologists and internists ordered exercise tests (56%) but cardiologists recommended thallium studies more often (73% vs 47%, 95% CI for difference: 10%-36%). For all scenarios, average charges for diagnostic evaluations by cardiologists and internists were similar. CONCLUSIONS: In 3 noncritical cardiology scenarios, discretionary test use by cardiologists and internists differed substantially, although this was not reflected in dollar resources. Internists tended toward a broader diagnostic evaluation while cardiologists tended to focus on cardiological tests. The potential effect on clinical outcomes is unknown.

Cardiology↗
PubMed1997

The role of medical necessity and cost-effectiveness in making medical decisions.

The term "medical necessity" is used ubiquitously in health care, but its meaning and implementation vary substantially among providers, payers, and patients. This ambiguity has led some to suggest that cost-effectiveness be used as a basis for decision rules. This paper presents an analytical framework that is familiar to clinicians and shows that medical necessity and cost-effectiveness do not provide deterministic rules for clinical decision making. First, 2 x 2 tables are used to show the tradeoff between the sensitivity and specificity of decision rules. Then, the example of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm is used to show that these tradeoffs can be seen as a continuum of decision rules on a receiver-operating characteristic curve. Society can therefore choose a decision threshold on the basis of medical necessity that optimizes the number of lives saved or any other desired outcome, but the tradeoff between sensitivity and specificity cannot be avoided. Applying cost-effectiveness criteria may change the decision threshold because cost-effectiveness itself involves inherent tradeoffs that create additional ambiguity for clinical decisions. The conclusion is that decision rules based on medical necessity or cost-effectiveness should not be considered deterministic. Rather, decision rules are useful when they make assumptions explicit and specify tradeoffs so that clinicians, patients, and payers can make better decisions.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed1997

Using proprietary methods to evaluate acute care admissions to a Veterans Affairs tertiary care center: are the appropriateness criteria appropriate?

An important question for facilities monitoring acute care bed admissions with proprietary criteria is whether these methodologies remain valid after substantial changes to the criteria sets. This is especially true for publicly funded hospitals whose medical and social mission is often broader than that of private sector facilities for which insurance-based claim review is most relevant. To further address this issue, we used sequential sets (1994 and 1995) of InterQual Intensity, Severity, and Discharge criteria to assess a cohort of patients referred to our Veterans Affairs facility as acute care admissions between December 1, 1994, and February 28, 1995. We found that the appropriateness rate for the subset of medical admissions dropped from 88% when using the 1994 criteria set to 49% when using the more stringent 1995 criteria set (P < 0.001). We conclude that substantive changes to previously validated criteria sets require revalidation. Furthermore, consideration should be given to the role that insurance-based utilization review should play in publicly funded hospital systems.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1997

Medical necessity and defined coverage benefits in the Oregon Health Plan.

The policy debate in Oregon has primarily focused on the Prioritized List of Services. However, little information is available on how defined coverage benefits and managed care affect the role of medical necessity in determining care for Medicaid patients. This issue is important because medical necessity determinations are currently used by many states to limit extraneous health care costs but require resource-intensive oversight, are open to wide variance, and frequently prompt litigation challenging interpretations of what is necessary and what is not. The qualitative study described here addressed whether medical necessity remains a salient and useful concept in the Oregon Health Plan. Our results indicate that defined coverage benefits, as described by the funded portion of the Prioritized List of Services, supplant medical necessity determinations for coverage, while managed care incentives limit the need for medical necessity determinations at the provider level. Clinical choices are, for the most part, guided by providers' judgment within the financial constraints of capitation and by targeted use management techniques. The combination of capitated care and Oregon's defined coverage benefits package has marginalized the use of medical necessity, albeit with consequences for state oversight of Medicaid services.

Government Regulation↗
PubMed1997

Defining and implementing medical necessity in Washington State and Oregon.

This paper reports on a qualitative study of how health care providers in the states of Washington and Oregon define and implement medical necessity. Based on a series of semi-structured interviews, we found that few insurers or health care plans in our sample attempted to resolve the ambiguities inherent in defining medical necessity. More importantly, our results suggest that physicians in managed care plans were not using general definitions of medical necessity to make clinical decisions, but instead relied on utilization management techniques to guide the use of medical resources. We conclude that medical necessity as an organizing principle for clinical practice decision making is likely to continue to erode in a managed care environment.

Decision Making, Organizational↗
PubMed1996

Physicians' personal malpractice experiences are not related to defensive clinical practices.

Whether personal malpractice experience is part of a tort signal prompting physicians to practice defensively is unclear. To explore this issue further, we assessed how physicians' malpractice experiences affect clinical decision making. We surveyed 1,540 physicians from four specialty groups (cardiologists, surgeons, obstetrician-gynecologists, and internists) using specialty-specific clinical scenarios. Physicians were in active private practice, were covered by a single malpractice insurer for five or more years, and worked in an eastern state. The net response rate was 54 percent (835 of 1,540) but measurable bias, based on practice characteristics, was negligible. Physicians evaluated clinical scenarios that were designed to maximize potential for finding positive defensive practices (extra tests and procedures). Then they rated how various factors influenced their decisions and answered questions on practice attitudes. The study compared management and testing recommendations among physicians with varying levels of malpractice exposure, which we defined in three separate ways. Participants were unaware of the study hypotheses. Physicians with greater malpractice experience showed no systematic differences in initial management choice or subsequent test recommendations. For example, similar percentages of internists in the top and bottom claims rate quartiles admitted a patient with syncope (78 percent versus 73 percent; p = 42), discharged a patient with nonspecific chest pain (80 percent versus 80 percent; p = .88), and delayed surgery in a patient with nonspecific changes on a electrocardiograph (58 percent versus 68 percent; p = .18). Attitudes about malpractice also did not differ with varying malpractice experience. Personal malpractice experience is not a predominant factor in the tort signal that prompts physicians to engage in defensive practices, to the extent that such practices exist.

Cardiology↗
PubMed1994

The 1966 enactment of Medicare: its effect on discharges from Los Angeles County-operated hospitals.

The effect of Medicare on two public hospitals in Los Angeles County was analyzed by examining the percentage of patients 65 years of age and older among all discharges from 1958 through 1971. At Harbor General Hospital, discharges of elderly patients had dropped from 21.7% to 7.9% by late 1966; at Los Angeles County General Hospital, discharges decreased from 15.3% to 10.7% between 1966 and 1967. Monitoring public hospitals' demographic changes after enacting a national health plan may provide information on patients' and providers' acceptance of insurance and on resources needed by public hospitals to care for those left without coverage.

Age Factors↗