Recognition as a patient-centered medical home: fundamental or incidental?

Dohan D, McCuistion MH, Frosch DL, Hung DY, Tai-Seale M.

Source

Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Little is known about reasons why a medical group would seek recognition as a patient-centered medical home (PCMH). We examined the motivations for seeking recognition in one group and assessed why the group allowed recognition to lapse 3 years later.

METHODS:

As part of a larger mixed methods case study, we conducted 38 key informant interviews with executives, clinicians, and front-line staff. Interviews were conducted according to a guide that evolved during the project and were audio-recorded and fully transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed and thematically coded.

RESULTS:

PCMH principles were consistent with the organization's culture and mission, which valued innovation and putting patients first. Motivations for implementing specific PCMH components varied; some components were seen as part of the organization's patient-centered culture, whereas others helped the practice compete in its local market. Informants consistently reported that National Committee for Quality Assurance recognition arose incidentally because of a 1-time incentive from a local group of large employers and because the organization decided to allocate some organizational resources to respond to the complex reporting requirements for about one-half of its clinics.

CONCLUSIONS:

Becoming patient centered and seeking recognition as such ran along separate but parallel tracks within this organization. As the Affordable Care Act continues to focus attention on primary care redesign, this apparent disconnect should be borne in mind.