Unifying Outpatient Practices to Redress Structural Racism in an Urban Health System.

IF 9.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Sofia R Schlozman, Margaret Smirnoff, Ann Scheck McAlearney, Carol R Horowitz, Lynne D Richardson, Radhi Yagnik, Nina A Bickell
{"title":"Unifying Outpatient Practices to Redress Structural Racism in an Urban Health System.","authors":"Sofia R Schlozman, Margaret Smirnoff, Ann Scheck McAlearney, Carol R Horowitz, Lynne D Richardson, Radhi Yagnik, Nina A Bickell","doi":"10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.5520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>There is a strong and increasing focus on redressing structural racism in health care systems. Structural racism persists by separating clinical care sites that treat patients of racial and ethnic minority groups who are disproportionately covered by Medicaid from sites that treat patients who are White and disproportionately covered by commercial insurance. Practice unification refers to efforts to eliminate this form of segregation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To define and investigate the facilitators, barriers, and the effects associated with unification of outpatient practices to reduce structural racism in a large urban health system.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This qualitative study used semistructured interviews conducted within a large urban health system in New York from February to October 2023. Trained researchers interviewed clinical and administrative leaders of outpatient clinical practices that were pursuing unification, and health system leaders overseeing multiple practices.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Thematic analysis was used to identify facilitators of and barriers to unification, challenges and benefits after unification, and persistent dimensions of segregation within clinics that had nominally unified. These insights were used to create a framework for the unification process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The thematic analysis included qualitative information from 5 administrative leaders, 12 clinical leaders, and 6 health system leaders, and found that unification facilitators were financial benefit, relocation to new facility spaces, and advocacy by leaders and trainees, while barriers were financial concerns, space constraints, and physician and staff attitudes. After attaining and experiencing some degree of practice unification, interviewees reported financial gain, more support staff, perceptions of greater equity, better educational experiences, and increased practitioner and trainee satisfaction. Challenges reported after unification were changes in staff roles, financial concerns, patient dissatisfaction, and difficulties interfacing with segregated practices within the health system. Partially unified practices maintained dimensions of segregation, by practitioner, payer, and/or scheduling/time (temporal segregation).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This qualitative study found that outpatient practice unification was perceived to be a financially and equity-driven process with multiple dimensions. However, not all of the unification procedures had been completely implemented. These findings indicate that successful unification of outpatient practices in a large urban health care system requires attention to multiple dimensions, as well as overcoming challenges regarding finances, facility space, reimbursement policies, and patient and staff satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":53180,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Health Forum","volume":"6 2","pages":"e245520"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11846003/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Health Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.5520","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: There is a strong and increasing focus on redressing structural racism in health care systems. Structural racism persists by separating clinical care sites that treat patients of racial and ethnic minority groups who are disproportionately covered by Medicaid from sites that treat patients who are White and disproportionately covered by commercial insurance. Practice unification refers to efforts to eliminate this form of segregation.

Objective: To define and investigate the facilitators, barriers, and the effects associated with unification of outpatient practices to reduce structural racism in a large urban health system.

Design, setting, and participants: This qualitative study used semistructured interviews conducted within a large urban health system in New York from February to October 2023. Trained researchers interviewed clinical and administrative leaders of outpatient clinical practices that were pursuing unification, and health system leaders overseeing multiple practices.

Main outcomes and measures: Thematic analysis was used to identify facilitators of and barriers to unification, challenges and benefits after unification, and persistent dimensions of segregation within clinics that had nominally unified. These insights were used to create a framework for the unification process.

Results: The thematic analysis included qualitative information from 5 administrative leaders, 12 clinical leaders, and 6 health system leaders, and found that unification facilitators were financial benefit, relocation to new facility spaces, and advocacy by leaders and trainees, while barriers were financial concerns, space constraints, and physician and staff attitudes. After attaining and experiencing some degree of practice unification, interviewees reported financial gain, more support staff, perceptions of greater equity, better educational experiences, and increased practitioner and trainee satisfaction. Challenges reported after unification were changes in staff roles, financial concerns, patient dissatisfaction, and difficulties interfacing with segregated practices within the health system. Partially unified practices maintained dimensions of segregation, by practitioner, payer, and/or scheduling/time (temporal segregation).

Conclusions and relevance: This qualitative study found that outpatient practice unification was perceived to be a financially and equity-driven process with multiple dimensions. However, not all of the unification procedures had been completely implemented. These findings indicate that successful unification of outpatient practices in a large urban health care system requires attention to multiple dimensions, as well as overcoming challenges regarding finances, facility space, reimbursement policies, and patient and staff satisfaction.

重要性:人们越来越重视纠正医疗保健系统中的结构性种族主义。结构性种族主义持续存在的原因是,治疗少数种族和少数族裔群体病人的临床医疗点与治疗白人病人的临床医疗点被隔离开来,前者享受医疗补助(Medicaid)的比例过高,而后者享受商业保险的比例过高。统一诊疗是指努力消除这种形式的隔离:目的:在一个大型城市医疗系统中,确定并调查与统一门诊实践相关的促进因素、障碍和影响,以减少结构性种族主义:这项定性研究采用半结构式访谈,于 2023 年 2 月至 10 月在纽约的一个大型城市医疗系统内进行。经过培训的研究人员采访了正在寻求统一的门诊临床实践的临床和行政领导,以及监管多个实践的医疗系统领导:通过主题分析,研究人员确定了统一的促进因素和障碍、统一后的挑战和益处,以及名义上已经统一的诊所内部持续存在的隔离问题。这些洞察力被用于创建一个统一进程框架:专题分析包括来自 5 位行政领导、12 位临床领导和 6 位医疗系统领导的定性信息,结果发现,统一的促进因素是经济利益、搬迁到新的设施空间以及领导和学员的倡导,而障碍则是财务问题、空间限制以及医生和员工的态度。在实现并经历了一定程度的业务统一后,受访者报告了经济收益、更多的支持人员、更公平的观念、更好的教育体验以及从业人员和受训人员满意度的提高。据报告,统一后面临的挑战是员工角色的变化、财务问题、病人的不满以及与医疗系统内隔离执业机构的沟通困难。部分统一后的医疗机构仍保持着按从业人员、付款人和/或时间安排/时间(时间上的隔离)等方面的隔离:这项定性研究发现,门诊医疗机构的统一被认为是一个以财务和公平为导向的过程,涉及多个方面。然而,并非所有的统一程序都已完全实施。这些研究结果表明,在一个大型城市医疗系统中,门诊业务的成功统一需要关注多个方面,并克服财务、设施空间、报销政策以及患者和员工满意度等方面的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
7.80%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA Health Forum is an international, peer-reviewed, online, open access journal that addresses health policy and strategies affecting medicine, health, and health care. The journal publishes original research, evidence-based reports, and opinion about national and global health policy. It covers innovative approaches to health care delivery and health care economics, access, quality, safety, equity, and reform. In addition to publishing articles, JAMA Health Forum also features commentary from health policy leaders on the JAMA Forum. It covers news briefs on major reports released by government agencies, foundations, health policy think tanks, and other policy-focused organizations. JAMA Health Forum is a member of the JAMA Network, which is a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications. The journal presents curated health policy content from across the JAMA Network, including journals such as JAMA and JAMA Internal Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信