Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 5, 2025
Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
Published on: February 16, 2011
Outcomes that Matter: High-Needs Patients' and Primary Care Leaders' Perspectives on an Intensive Primary Care Pilot
Michelle S Wong1, Tana M Luger2,3, Marian L Katz2
1Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation & Policy (CSHIIP), VA Greater Los Angeles HSR&D, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Michelle.Wong6@va.gov.
Background:
Quantitative evaluations of the effectiveness of intensive primary care (IPC) programs for high-needs patients have yielded mixed results for improving healthcare utilization, cost, and mortality. However, IPC programs may provide other value.
Objective:
To understand the perspectives of high-needs patients and primary care facility leaders on the effects of a Veterans Affairs (VA) IPC program on patients.
Design:
A total of 66 semi-structured telephone interviews with high-needs VA patients and primary care facility leaders were conducted as part of the IPC program evaluation.
Participants:
High-needs patients (n = 51) and primary care facility leaders (n = 15) at 5 VA pilot sites.
Approach:
We used content analysis to examine interview transcripts for both a priori and emergent themes about perceived IPC program effects.
Key Results:
Patients enrolled in VA IPCs reported improvements in their experience of VA care (e.g., patient-provider relationship, access to their team). Both patients and leaders reported improvements in patient motivation to engage with self-care and with their IPC team, and behaviors, especially diet, exercise, and medication management. Patients also perceived improvements in health and described receiving assistance with social needs. Despite this, patients and leaders also outlined patient health characteristics and contextual factors (e.g., chronic health conditions, housing insecurity) that may have limited the effectiveness of the program on healthcare cost and utilization.
Conclusions:
Patients and primary care facility leaders report benefits for high-needs patients from IPC interventions that translated into perceived improvements in healthcare, health behaviors, and physical and mental health status. Most program evaluations focus on cost and utilization, which may be less amenable to change given this cohort's numerous comorbid health conditions and complex social circumstances. Future IPC program evaluations should additionally examine IPC's effects on quality of care, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and patient health behaviors other than utilization (e.g., engagement, self-efficacy).
More Related Videos
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Related Concept Videos
01:13Patient-centered Care
01:30Primary Healthcare Services
In 1978, international leaders convened in Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan, for what would be a pivotal event in global health. The Alma-Ata Declaration was the first to call...
01:15Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
01:18Introduction To Health Care Delivery System
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) advocates for a patient-centered, effective, safe, timely, equitable, and effective healthcare system. The National Priorities...
01:29Documentation in Long-Term and Home Healthcare Setting
Long-Term Care Facilities
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...