arv management: is anybody home? hivqual workshop bruce agins md mph october 15th, 2003
TRANSCRIPT
ARV MANAGEMENT: Is Anybody Home?
HIVQUAL Workshop
BRUCE AGINS MD MPHOctober 15th, 2003
The ARV Indicator
ARV Data
The Letter
The Responses
Next Steps
The ARV Indicator
What’s an Unstable Patient Anyways?
Stable Patient: Definition
Viral load is undetectable, or Viral load has dropped by at least one
log since last 4-month review period, or Viral load has increased by less than 3X
from the lowest value in last 12 months on that regimen and
A note in the patient record by the treating physician states that the patient is stable despite detectable viral load
Stable Patient: Considerations for the Reviewer
Viral load is dropping (but not yet undetectable) or
VL has increased by less than 3X from the lowest value in last 12 months, or
A note in the patient record by the treating physician states that the patient is stable despite detectable viral load
Stable Patient: Appropriate Management
Monitoring of viral load every 4 months
Unstable Patient: Definition
Viral load is increasing by more than 1 log and absolute value is over 1,000; or
CD4 is dropping by 50% since last 4-month review period or
Patient deemed unstable by physician or
OI in the last four month review period (new or recurrent); or
Unstable Patient: Appropriate Management
Three Options:– Regimen was changed and viral load assay
performed within 8 weeks of decision– Justification provided not to change therapy
• intercurrent illness, recent vaccination, adherence intervention documented, viral load reordered, resistance testing ordered, other and
• viral load assay performed within 8 weeks of decision
– Decision made to discontinue therapy and clinical follow-up plan noted in record
Unstable Patient: Appropriate Management
Ultimately, the decision about whether the patient is stable or unstable is made by the clinician
The Data
Data: AIDS Institute Response
Review of data raises concerns about appropriateness of care about management of ARV in unstable patients
Staff review medical records to assess validity of indicator and discover causes of poor performance
Review confirms that the data are accurate Concern raised to Advisory Committee which
recommends that we send letter to facilities to raise awareness
Data: Advisory Committee Suggestions
Send letters asking for explanation & to review systems of care for ARV management
Arrange individual meetings to discuss low scores Highlight below average results in reports Develop tracking forms with prompts to address
abnormal results Develop best practices to improve ARV
performance
Data: Advisory Committee Suggestions
Think about systems problems– Delays in lab results– Panic Value Systems– Direct transmission of results to medical
directors Correlate with HIV Specialist data Provider education focusing on management of
patients with high viral loads receiving antiretroviral therapy
Data: Mailing
Non-HIVQUAL sites:– 2001 data mailed to facilities
HIVQUAL sites:– Data entered and can be produced by
facility
The Letter
The Letter
Sent to facilities with performance of 70% or lower
Mailing date of January 8, 2003 Results in red and boxed Copies sent to Program Medical Director and
Program Administrator Asks facilities to review management of ARV in
their clinic as part of their HIV Quality Management Program focusing on systems
Respond to me via phone or email to discuss findings by early March, 2003
The Responses
Responses: Individual Factors
Physician not managing patients appropriately
Documentation poor by specific physicians
Responses: Indicator Issues
For patients with high viral loads, when the decision is made not to change therapy, VL does not need to be rechecked in 8 weeks
Inappropriate management for not ordering a resistance test?
Only one value is below threshold for ARV [should have been appropriate if documentation was provided since therapy was not offered]
Won’t pick up special case – no need for action or change [intercurrent illness diverting attention from ARV management and documentation]
Changes: Flow Sheets
Comprehensive flow sheets with key components of HIV care– HIV issues included now in routine visit sheet
Standardized forms covering the following areas: -CD4 and Viral load monitoring + trends -Triggers for VL>1000 -Adherence referrals -Defined follow-up intervals -Specific ARV management parameters -New medical visits Add HIV elements to standard medical visit sheet Medication flow sheet with documentation about
adherence
Changes: Provider Education
Review of guidelines and indicator definitions– Discuss concepts of stability/instability at physician meeting,
including management of ARV Integrate ARV management into routine provider meetings Specific education about ARV management to frontline
clinician staff Documentation requirements, including f/u of VL Adherence tools Meetings with HIV Specialist Preceptorships Increase number of HIV Specialists Attendance at IAS conferences Offer CME credits for HIV training
Changes: Provider Education (2)
Discuss when ARV should not be given Tighten resident supervision Train case workers about ARV management and
importance of routine monitoring Updates in HIV care at monthly provider meetings Weekly clinical conference for providers to
discuss complicated ARV decisions Attending review of fellows management
decisions Grand Rounds Case Presentations and seminars by HIV experts
Changes: Medical Director Involvement
Feedback to frontline practitioners Letter sent by medical director to medical staff
about guidelines for unstable patients Assign medical director as backup for complex
cases Designate clinician lead at each site Monitoring of clinical decisions by medical
director with random chart review Medical Director follow up on findings from
chart audits
Changes: Reminder Strategies
Follow-up calls by case manager or nurse Letters to no-shows Call no-shows Enhance outreach program Call before appointment Tickler file to send cards out for appointments Comprehensive no-show program – including
patient input into process for follow-up & checking in after visit - Montefiore
Changes: Self-Management
Patient Education/Empowerment Treatment readiness program, including importance of
keeping appts. Side effects education Information system with new appointment system to
easily track appointments Automated reminder system Database to track followup appointments and outcomes Incentives Patient diary to track labs, treatment, provide tips
about adherence and other educational materials Enhance role of CAB in reviewing data
Changes: Home Visits
COBRA Nursing staff VNS Adherence - ?DOT
Changes: Information Systems
Tracking databases QA database showing multiple
parameters Automated appointment tracking Scheduling database Use EMR data to monitor care
Changes: Tracking Systems
Logbooks Facilitate contact of no-shows Complete baseline assessments Create list of unstable patients, update
and use for tracking, referrals to multidisciplinary team
Routine updating of list of visits and missed appointments with direct feedback to medical providers
Changes: Documentation
Emphasize importance & general improvements Adherence counseling CM interventions included in record Reorganize medical records Clearly state in record whether patient is stable or
unstable Documentation of side-effects Incorporate pharmacy provider into adherence form
(Interfaith) Improve documentation of decision process about
ARV Hasten return of information and results to chart Information about no-shows
Changes: Documentation (2)
Stamp for progress note that includes criteria and stable/unstable status for use at every encounter (LICH)
Modify medical history and physical forms to improve documentation about ARV management
Patients sign that they are choosing not to take ARV (can reverse decision) [ENY]
Progress note developed to document & prompt providers at each visit to address & review CD4, VL, treatment plans, with prompt to document rationale for decisions & issues
leading to unstable status
Changes: QI Plans
Specific ARV QI Plan (Elmhurst, Scruggs) Unstable Patients Plan: (Middletown) -Review case with clinical coordinator -Contact case manager -use adherence information form -flag for resistance test or repeat VL -case conference Unstable Patients Plan -MD review -Team review -Tracking -Increase HIV Specialist involvement -Focused plans to facilitate adherence, expedite &
enhance access to multidisciplinary team services Monitor timeliness of viral loads
Changes: Lab Issues
Simplify review of results Shorten turnaround time for results Posting of results to computerized lab system,
including resistance testing Coordinate blood drawing with visit Staff drawing blood will ensure f/u clinic visit
scheduled in two weeks Loosen lab restrictions for processing
specimens Lab Error Plan (see next slide)
Responses: Lab Issues
Lab Error Plan (Scruggs)– Identify when blood not drawn or not picked up– Flag missing results for follow up– Nurse communicates routinely with lab staff– Lab log to track when labs were completed for checking
results within 14 d of draw– Immediate rescheduling if labs not obtained– CM and outreach staff to bring patient for labs– Coordinate with lab staff/address IS issues– Ongoing performance measurement
Changes: Case Conferencing
Focus on difficult cases Routine quarterly adherence
discussions Include as part of monthly provider
meeting in clinic
Changes: Adherence
Promote enrollment into adherence program Comprehensive treatment adherence services Increase referrals by physicians to adherence
counselors Increase appointment-keeping for labs Routine monitoring quarterly by case manager Pts who miss appts. meet with Medical
Director or administrator and may be referred elsewhere
Changes: Performance Measurement Routine medical record reviews: monthly, quarterly, Random ARV management reviews Independent reviewer Specific reviews of patients >1000 copies to
determine if unstable, and if so flag for special review Review of charts by medical director Modify indicators to incorporate indicators from
guidelines Develop new indicators to measure care of unstable
patients on ARV Review all unstable patients QA Database: shows values which can be flagged QOC review teams – multidisciplinary (Narco)
Changes: Staff & Visits
Hire new case managers
Special medication visit for unstable patients
Changes: Pharmacy Involvement
Delivery of medications onsite to ensure pickup whenever refills are due
Pharmacist onsite in clinic to discuss changes in regimen
Integrate pharmacy into adherence form
Responses: Systems Issues
Community Resources– Referral processes to CBOs documented
Other Responses
Patients who are non-adherent substance users and shouldn’t be counted in the sample
Patients don’t return for their lab tests or visits (“no shows”)
Results
Improvements have already been measured
Next Steps andSome Preliminary Observations
What Have We Learned So Far
Where’s the Data? Routine monitoring and QI that focuses
on ARV management is not occurring Minor tinkering with the indicator is
indicated Many providers pay attention to letters
flagging poor result
What Have We Learned So Far
Difficult issues to resolve include “no-shows” and complicated patients– Challenges of documentation– Complexity of management– Some innovative strategies!
Conclusions
Most people are home Lots of interesting innovations Some full-scale QI plans and programs Some are still stuck A handful are still not home
Next Steps
Responders– Encouragement– Ongoing follow-up– Some still need to provide QI information!– Follow up: compare subsequent results– Letter
Compilation of Best Practices and Innovative Solutions