Publications

Patient engagement is a fundamental strategy for achieving patient centred care and is receiving increasing attention in primary care reform efforts such as the patient-centred medical home and related care models. Much of the prior published theory and evidence supporting patient engagement has focused on improving engagement in individual care. Much less is understood about engaging patients as partners in practice improvement at the primary care clinic or practice level. We review the historical and policy context for the growing interest in the USA and UK in patient engagement at the primary care practice level, highlight findings from systematic reviews of the research evidence on practice-level patient engagement and discuss practical considerations for implementing patient engagement. We conclude that while there are persuasive ethical and social justice reasons for empowering patient involvement in practice improvement at the clinic level, research conducted to date in primary care provides suggestive but not yet resounding evidence in support of the instrumental triple aim benefit of practice-level patient engagement. We propose a research agenda to better understand the process and outcomes of practice-level patient engagement and its potential advantages to both the practice and the patients and communities served. Better evidence as well as resources to support and incentivize effective and feasible engagement methods are needed to catalyse greater diffusion of practice-level patient engagement in primary care practices.

BACKGROUND

Despite guideline recommendations that patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass surgery, or valve surgery be referred to cardiac rehabilitation, cardiac rehabilitation is underused. The objective of this study was to examine hospital-level variation in cardiac rehabilitation referral after PCI, coronary artery bypass surgery, and valve surgery.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analyzed data from the Clinical Outcomes Assessment Program, a registry of all nonfederal hospitals performing PCI and cardiac surgery in Washington State. We included eligible PCI, coronary artery bypass surgery, and valve surgery patients from 2010 to 2015. We analyzed PCI and cardiac surgery separately by performing multivariable hierarchical logistic regression for the outcome of cardiac rehabilitation referral at discharge, clustered by hospital. Patient-level covariates included age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, and procedure indication/status. Cardiac rehabilitation referral was reported in 48% (34 047/71 556) of PCI patients and 91% (21 831/23 972) of cardiac surgery patients. The hospital performing the procedure was a stronger predictor of referral than any individual patient characteristic for PCI (hospital referral range 3%-97%; median odds ratio, 5.94; 95% confidence interval, 4.10-9.49) and cardiac surgery (range 54%-100%; median odds ratio, 7.09; 95% confidence interval, 3.79-17.80). Hospitals having an outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program explained only 10% of PCI variation and 0% of cardiac surgery variation.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac rehabilitation referral at discharge was less prevalent after PCI than cardiac surgery. The strongest predictor of cardiac rehabilitation referral was the hospital performing the procedure. Efforts to improve cardiac rehabilitation referral should focus on increasing referral after PCI, especially in low referral hospitals.