1 / 27

Extending Preventive Care to Pediatric Urgent Care

Extending Preventive Care to Pediatric Urgent Care. A Partnership Between: University of California, San Francisco & Kaiser Permanente Northern California Mary-Ann Shafer MD & Kathleen Tebb PhD Presentation to STD Prevention Conference March 10, 2004

dane
Download Presentation

Extending Preventive Care to Pediatric Urgent Care

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Extending Preventive Care to Pediatric Urgent Care A Partnership Between: University of California, San Francisco & Kaiser Permanente Northern California Mary-Ann Shafer MD & Kathleen Tebb PhD Presentation to STD Prevention Conference March 10, 2004 Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & The Agency for Health Care Research and Quality

  2. BackgroundFacts About Chlamydia Trachomatis (CT) • Rate is 6-12% in teen females • 70-80% are asymptomatic • 10-20% untreated  PID infertility • NAATs 90-95% sensitivity/specificity • Nat’l Guidelines  annual CT screen

  3. Background cont. • Clinical Practice Improvement intervention (CPI) increased CT screening of sexually active teens at pediatric well care visits (WCVs) • Yet, over 50% of adolescents are seen only for urgent care visits (UCVs), in any given year

  4. JAMA December 11, 2002

  5. Learning Objectives • Review the development, implementation and evaluation of a systems-based intervention for CT screening • Understand utilization patterns of teens seen in well versus urgent care • Discuss the translation of the CPI model to different clinical settings

  6. Study Objectives • Develop a modified CPI (clinical practice improvement) intervention to address barriers to CT screening during UCVs • Examine feasibility of CT screening attending pediatric UCVs in a large HMO

  7. Methods • Setting • Large HMO in Northern California: KPMG • 2 Pediatric clinics participating in the previous well-care CPI intervention • 14-18 yo females seen for UCVs • ~4,000 enrolled 14-18 yo adolescent females in 2 sites

  8. Methods KP Pediatric Setting cont. • Well-Care Visit • Appointment required • Physical exam (every 2-3 yrs) • 20 minute visit • Urgent-Care Visit • Same/ next day visit • Sick/ non-ER visit • 10 minute visit • Same physical setting as WCV • Same providers & staff as WCV

  9. Methods • Design • Pre-Post test study • Provider survey (anonymous) to assess attitudes toward screening in UCV • Teen survey (anonymous) for sex active rate • Comparison of baseline CT screening rates to 6 month post-test rates

  10. Clinical Practice Improvement Model Engage Team Building Re-Design Clinical Practice Sustain the Gain

  11. Clinical Practice Improvement Model • Leadership • Best practices • Define gap • Raise Awareness Engage Team Building Re-Design Clinical Practice Sustain the Gain

  12. Clinical Practice Improvement Model • ACTeam • Skill building • Tool Kit Engage Team Building Re-Design Clinical Practice Sustain the Gain

  13. Clinical Practice Improvement Model Engage • Customize • Measure success Team Building Re-Design Clinical Practice Sustain the Gain

  14. Clinical Practice Improvement Model Engage • Monitor performance • Time series analysis • Continuous improvement Team Building Re-Design Clinical Practice Sustain the Gain

  15. Rapid Cycle Changes • ACTeam Meeting • Set Goal • Identify barriers • Decide solution • Try it out • Reassess • Repeat “cycle” % Change in STD Screening Rate S t a t u s Q u o Time in months

  16. Site Specific Flow Chart Cue Charts Room Patient MD/NP VISIT Urines To Lab Follow-Up ID eligible teens • C Charts are stamped with cue MA collects FVU on all 14-18 yo F • TTeen takes FVU sample to exam room MD/NP obtains sex hx If sexually active, MD completes CT lab slip • W • WWrites confid. # on chart RN contacts CT + teen: confid. # Teen comes to clinic for Rx RN enters Rx in STD log book MA refrigerates FVUs A enters teen name, confidential # in clinic log book • LRunner takes FVU to lab

  17. Data Bases and Analysis Data Bases • Registration + lab + anonymous survey of teens for clinic specific screening rates Data Analysis • Mann-Whitney/T-test

  18. Data Analyses: CT Screening Rate Screening Rate = No. of CT tests Sexually active teen females* *Site specific sexual activity rates determined by anonymous survey

  19. RESULTS

  20. Urgent Care vs Well Care Population • Teen girls who utilize urgent care compared to well care visits have a higher STD risk profile: • Older (15.7 vs 15.4 years)* • More ethnically diverse (Cauc/Asian vs. Oth)* • Higher sexual activity rates (42% vs 26%)* • *p<0.05

  21. Pediatrician Survey Results CT Screening Likelihood during UCV: (1=not likely, 4=very likely)

  22. MD’s Top 3 Barriers to UCV Screening • Parents in room/confidentiality • Competing priorities • Discomfort in taking sexual history

  23. RESULTS: Female CT Screening Rate in Urgent Care Pilot Sites % SA Females Screened for CT A B A B B

  24. Conclusions • CT screening in pediatric UCVs is feasible • Significantlymore teens screened for CT • Clinic differences different results • More research needed (e.g., RCT, more clinics)

  25. Implications • CT epidemic  universal screening recommended • Most teens seen only in UCVs and they have a higher STD risk profile screen for CT in well and urgent care “Do Today’s Work Today” • The CPI model (rapid-cycle change) may be generalizable to other services & clinic settings

  26. Implications cont. • Rapid cyclequick, dramatic & sustained • Effective in different settings- well & urgent and likely others as well • Capitalizes upon existing resources & staff • Small changes LARGE effects • Gives chronically over-worked staff sense of importance, success & control over workplace

More Related