New Marketplace

A Successful Pilot to Improve Access by Adjusting Discharge and Follow-Up Rates

Case Study · November 29, 2018

Facing high demand for its services, the dermatology department at a major Boston hospital sought to expand patient access by motivating physicians to increase discharge rates and lengthen intervals between appointments, where medically appropriate. The quality improvement intervention opened up nearly 300 appointment slots during the 3-month study.

Key Takeaways

  1. Discharge rates and follow-up intervals for medical dermatology patients can be increased through targeted feedback.

  2. Actionable data and modest financial incentives can help motivate clinicians to adjust their behavior around scheduling follow-up appointments.

  3. Strategies used in this study may prove useful for practices trying to increase access and contain per-patient costs through quality improvement measures.

  4. More research is needed to establish evidence-based guidelines for follow-up appointments for many diagnoses in dermatology.

The Challenge

Dermatology services continue to be in great demand, resulting in long waits in many areas of the United States. Timely access to appropriate specialists is important because it can meaningfully improve care, outcomes, and patient satisfaction, and is likely to be cost-effective. Given these advantages, access to specialists is a priority in accountable care organizations and central to population health management strategies.

In the absence of major changes in the dermatologic workforce, a powerful lever affecting access is managing the frequency of follow-up visits, which typically comprise 80 to 85% of office visits. Frequency adjustments can be achieved by increasing discharge rates and lengthening intervals between appointments.

Appropriate follow-up intervals have not been established for most diagnoses in medicine, including dermatology, and are typically a matter of habit, rather than evidence-based practice. However, small adjustments in follow-up times, such as extending them by 10%, can open access in a sustainable way and decrease utilization per capita. For a patient presenting with acne, for example, it is typical to recommend an initial follow-up visit in 3 months (four times a year). Shifting to three times a year instead of four does not, intuitively, seem likely to make a clinical difference for most patients, and this adjustment yields 25% more follow-up visits. Moreover, some therapies do not reach peak effectiveness until 6 months, so extending follow-up appointments in these scenarios makes sense.

The Goal

We set out to determine if discharge rates and follow-up intervals could be increased using a quality improvement initiative.

The Execution

We conducted a 3-month intervention that offered modest incentive payments to participating dermatologists who increased their discharge rates by 5% or extended their follow-up intervals by 7.5% over their own baseline.

The intervention was implemented at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Dermatology Associates in medical dermatology, which employs 32 physicians. It was incorporated into the Massachusetts General Physicians Organization Quality Incentive Program, which provides incremental financial incentives to salaried MGH-affiliated physicians who achieve specific quality and safety improvement targets.

Before the pilot, we convened several work groups to evaluate recommended follow-up intervals for commonly seen diagnoses, such as nonmelanoma skin cancer. In most cases, there was little evidence to establish appropriate follow-up intervals. However, in reviewing the literature for some conditions, such as basal cell carcinoma, we concluded that we were seeing certain patients more frequently than needed in follow-up. We presented the results at a faculty meeting to develop buy-in for the pilot.

Twenty-three physicians were eligible based on sufficient clinical activity in medical dermatology, and the following baseline metrics were calculated per physician from March through May 2013:

  • Discharge Rate: Percent of arrived appointments where the patient did not subsequently arrive for a future appointment within 15 months.
  • Follow-up Interval: Average number of days between an arrived appointment and the next arrived appointment within 15 months.

Initial appointments were ascribed to each physician, and if a patient arrived for an appointment within 15 months, it counted as a follow-up arrived appointment, even if it was with a different physician. During the intervention, which ran July to September 2013, physicians received their baseline information and then biweekly dashboards tracking their weekly and total (cumulative) progress against their individual goal — which was set in relation to their baseline.

Discharge Rates and Follow-Up Internval Dashboard for One Provider at MGH Dermatology

  Click To Enlarge.

Participants received incentive payments if they increased their scheduled discharge rates by 5% or extended their follow-up intervals by 7.5% over the 12-week period, regardless of patient volume or diagnoses. The department set these targets based on the premise that each physician could realistically make adjustments for at least some patients in their panel. Physicians were given the option to either discharge a patient or extend the follow-up visit, where appropriate. An example of a discharge would be a 23-year-old patient who arrived for an initial evaluation of a normal-looking mole, with few risk factors (young, works inside, few moles, etc.). Many patients like this can be seen again in several years, but habit has been to schedule an annual follow-up.

The payment was roughly $800, following the quality incentive program guidelines. However, consistent with experience and data that physicians respond to incentive programs that provide distinct goals but fairly modest financial rewards, our physicians were also motivated to achieve the performance goal. We were not overly concerned about the dermatologists discharging patients too early to influence their results. Our physicians regularly advise patients, on discharge or extended follow-up, to return if an interim problem arises.

The Team

Key team members needed to make this project effective included: a physician leader to design the intervention and engage physicians around the vision of the project; a physician champion to lead discussions within the department on the current evidence base; a data scientist to create the algorithms to extract data from the scheduling platform; and a project manager to help with generating timely and frequent reports to individual physicians.

Metrics

We fit generalized multivariate linear models to determine statistical significance, holding the physician as a random effect for the discharge rates and follow-up intervals between the intervention and baseline. In addition, we used the change in discharge rates to estimate the number of appointment slots freed up as a direct result of the intervention. We could then calculate the expected number of appointment slots that could be opened annually for the entire department.

Results

At the end of the intervention period, 19 of 23 physicians met the goal, either by increasing their discharge rate or follow-up intervals. The department’s overall discharge rate rose during the pilot to 35.6%, up from 32.6% (P<0.0001). The average follow-up week interval rose to 27.4 weeks, up from to 26.1 weeks (P<0.0001). This increase was likely affected by the conversion of some annual follow-up visits into discharges, which shortened the average follow-up time for the remaining patients and so may underestimate the true effect.

The 3% increase in the discharge rate freed up an estimated 287 appointment slots during the 3-month study. For a department with approximately 35,000 arrived follow-up appointments, a similar change could theoretically open up 1,050 appointment slots annually. (A limitation was that some patients might have booked appointments after the observation period, which would lead to a lower actual discharge rate.)

This improvement also has the potential to reduce per-patient costs through a reduction in the overall number of visits.

Conclusion

This study introduces two actionable metrics that can be used to raise awareness among physicians, improve patient access, and decrease the cost of care per patient. Using actionable data and modest incentives embedded in our ongoing quality improvement program, clinicians were able to reduce the number of follow-up visits (by managing discharges), as well as lengthen intervals between appointments, resulting in increased availability for new patients. Because dermatology is a specialty with unmet demand, this intervention is a winning strategy for patient care, patient satisfaction, and population management.

Our study is limited because it was performed in a single department for a 3-month intervention. However, we believe the results are generalizable to other specialties.

Where to Start

To implement this plan, appropriate follow-up intervals must first be established based on health care outcomes. For diagnoses that already have established guidelines, physicians must make adjustments to adhere to these recommended interval lengths, rather than relying on habit. Where none exist, research efforts must be focused on developing evidence-based guidelines for follow-up visits for common chronic diagnoses.

Call for submissions:

Now inviting expert articles, longform articles, and case studies for peer review

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

More From New Marketplace
A Look at the Four Pillars of Primary Care

Pay for Relationship: A Novel Solution to the Primary Care Crisis

What society should and can pay for is care that enables relationships between patients and providers.

Examples of Stages of AI Technology Development and Diffusion

How Artificial Intelligence Is Changing Health Care Delivery

The development of intelligent machines holds great promise for making health care delivery more accurate, efficient, and accessible, but challenges remain for incorporating AI technology into clinical and administrative settings.

Recommendations to Resolve Information Asymmetry at the Strategic Level

Information Asymmetry: The Untapped Value of the Patient

The knowledge and preferences that patients could — and should — share with clinicians would restore balance to point-of-care interactions, leading to better outcomes and enhanced value.

Key Components for Health Care Systems to Address Patient Affordability

The Next Frontier in Reducing Costs of Care: Patient Affordability

To create meaningful point-of-care guidance so that patients can make informed medical and financial decisions, health system leaders and policymakers can develop interventions to address four major components of a proposed patient affordability scale.

Direct-to-Consumer Telemedicine Is the Biggest Coming Threat to Traditional Health Care Organizations

Survey Snapshot: Mega-Mergers and Telemedicine Accelerate Convenient Care Growth

NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members detail how providers are looking to direct-to-consumer telemedicine and partnerships to meet the differing needs of their patient populations.

Opelka01_pullquote - ACS IPU team-based surgical care bundles playbook

Developing a Playbook for IPU-based Surgical Care and New Payment Models

The complexity associated with most surgery lends itself to the integrated practice unit structure, with its focus on the care team and value-based payment.

Convenient Care Has Been Good Overall for the Health Care Industry

New Marketplace Survey: Convenient Care — Opportunity, Threat, or Both?

A survey of the NEJM Catalyst Insights Council shows conflicting views about both the value of convenient care and what respondents’ organizations should do.

Payer-Provider Partnerships Produce Better Quality Outcomes 3 - community health plan - physician partnership

New Research Shows How Payer-Provider Partnerships Can Accelerate Adoption of Evidence-Based Care

Five best practices that are replicable and scalable are facilitating improved clinical and financial outcomes today.

30-Day Mortality Rates at Non-Teaching and Major Teaching Hospitals 2013-2014 - value-based care at academic medical centers

What Value-Based Payment Means for Academic Medical Centers

Academic medical centers must become as dedicated to advancing operational and clinical efficiency as they have been to advancing the science of medicine.

Medicare Compared to Private Spending Cumulative Growth 2009-2019 - traditional Medicare coverage

Redesigning Medicare to Work for Everyone

A proposal to improve the Medicare benefit package.

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

Topics

Platforming Health Care to Transform Care…

Health care leaders need to focus less on ownership and control of the delivery process,…

Achieving Value in Highly Complex Acute…

To improve both the value and outcomes of ECLS, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center created guidelines for…

Build vs. Buy: What Should Health…

The consolidation craze continues, but vertical integration has yet to demonstrate real progress toward the…

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now