Search results

Showing 1 – 9 of 9 results.
Curated

Community Hospital Program (CHP) Access Impact Evaluation Surveys, 1978-1979, 1981 (ICPSR 8245)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1978-01-01--1979-01-01
This data collection evaluates group medical practices and the ways in which they affect both access to and use of medical services. Group practices, sponsored by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Community Hospital Program (CHP), were selected for use in this assessment. The data were collected by the Center for Health Administration Studies at the University of Chicago, with the assistance of Chilton Research Services. Two surveys were conducted for the study: a baseline survey in 1978-1979 and a follow-up in 1981. Community residents and CHP patients in 12 communities were interviewed. Demographic and medical care data were collected for selected individuals and families in the survey areas. Data on regular sources of medical care for individuals include the type of organization used, type of practice, accessibility, frequency of visits, types of health care professionals seen, cost, and satisfaction. Also in the collection are data on perceived health, episodes of illness (including symptoms, duration, disability days, and doctors consulted), use of preventive health care services, and insurance coverage. Demographic data for individuals and families include age, sex, race, educational attainment, employment, and income. Of the 198 files in this collection, 88 are "raw" data files and 110 are frequencies. The data files consist of four types. The first type are Sample Person files. These contain the responses of group practice patients and community members. The second type are Doctor Episode files, which record doctors and episodes of illness. Family files make up the third type of file, and consist of family members' responses to the survey. Analysis files, linking patient and doctor data, are the fourth type of file. The SPSS frequency files correspond to the data files: two per file for the Sample Person files, and one per file for the remaining three types of files.
Curated

National Evaluation of Rural Primary Health Care Programs, 1979-1982 (ICPSR 8534)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1979-01-01--1982-01-01
This data collection effort was undertaken in order to determine what kinds of program development strategies prove most effective for health care programs in different communities, specifically those defined as rural. Effectiveness of these programs was measured in terms of patient access to medical care, stability of the health care programs, and the impact of the programs on those they serve. General areas investigated in the surveys include program developmental methods, administrative structure, community setting, provider characteristics, financial policy, range of services offered, and consumer satisfaction.
Curated

National Study of Internal Medicine, Physician Practice Study, Phase III, 1981 (ICPSR 8301)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
This data collection contains information on the practices of young internists in order to understand the determinants of different practice styles, especially the relationship between training and practice, and to compare the practices of four groups of physicians: (1) general internists with traditional residencies, (2) general internists who received their residency training in special primary care tracks, (3) family physicians, and (4) subspecialty internists. The study queried a national sample of residents and fellows who were in training during 1976-1977 about their current positions, activities, patients, physician-patient relationships, family backgrounds, and educational training histories. Patients of these doctors were also surveyed. Demographic characteristics, such as age, sex, race, educational level, work status, marital status, and income, were recorded for the patient respondents. Background information on physicians includes family, educational history, and income.
Curated

National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness II (NSPO2), 2006-2007 (ICPSR 29801)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2006-01-01--2007-01-01

The National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness (NSPO) was designed to improve understanding of evidence-based care management processes (CMPs) as they relate to physician organizations (POs), that is, independent practice associations (IPAs) and medical groups. Since the first NSPO survey of physician organizations in 2000-2001 (NSPO1, archived as ICPSR 4455), considerable investments have been made by a number of different sources, including the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the California Healthcare Foundation, and The Commonwealth Fund, to bring about improved care for the chronically ill. This survey, the second NSPO survey of IPAs and medical groups (NSPO2), examined the extent to which the investments in quality improvement were translated into action. NSPO2 assessed the status of CMPs and preventive services use as well as their key drivers in 2006-2007 and the extent to which these factors have changed over time. As in the first NSPO survey, NSPO2 focused on the treatment of four chronic diseases: asthma, congestive heart failure (CHF), depression, and diabetes. Topics covered by the survey include practice type, size, age, ownership, and number of locations; clinical information systems; care management and clinical practice; activities of health insurance plans in chronic illness care; performance incentives; preventative care and health promotion; and organizational culture.

This collection has two data files. The first file contains the NSPO2 survey data, while the second contains a crosswalk between the NSPO1 and NSPO2 case identification numbers which can be used to link the data of the POs that responded to both surveys. Altogether, 369 of the 1,104 POs that responded to NSPO1 also responded to NSPO2.

Curated

National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness (NSPO), 2000-2001 (ICPSR 4455)

Released/updated on: 2006-05-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-01-01--2001-01-01
The National Study of Physician Organizations and the Management of Chronic Illness (NSPO) examined relationships among physician organization characteristics and the implementation of care management processes (CMP) aimed at improving outcomes and reducing costs for the treatment of four chronic diseases: asthma, congestive heart failure (CHF), depression, and diabetes. To that end, NSPO conducted this national survey of medical groups and independent practice associations (IPA) with 20 or more physicians. An IPA is defined as an organization through which physicians contract with managed care plans. Examples of CMPs include evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, protocols and pathways, case and care management systems, and disease management, demand management, and health promotion programs. Interviews were conducted with the medical director, president, or chief executive officer of each surveyed physician organization. The survey collected data on (1) practice type, size, age, location, and ownership, (2) governance, management, and use of computerized data systems, (3) revenue and overall financial position, (4) physician compensation models, (5) relationships with health plans and degree of risk assumption, and (6) care management and clinical practice -- particularly in regard to asthma, CHF, depression, and diabetes.
Curated
Partially restricted

National Survey of Attitudes and Choices in Medical Education and Training (ACMET) II, 1997 (ICPSR 3317)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
The purpose of this study was threefold: (1) to assess the effects of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Generalist Physician Initiative (GPI) on attitudes toward primary care among a national cross-sectional sample of medical students, residents, faculty, residency training directors (RTDs), chairpersons, and medical school deans\; (2) to conduct a longitudinal study of medical student, resident, and faculty participants from ACMET I (1994) and ACMET II (1997) to measure changes over time in attitudes and beliefs about primary care and primary care career choice\; and (3) to survey a nationally representative sample of medical students, residents, faculty, RTDs, chairpersons, and medical school deans about their attitudes toward managed care. The GPI challenged schools of medicine, in collaboration with state governments, private insurers, HMOs, hospitals, and community health centers, to increase the supply of generalist physicians (general internal medicine, general pediatrics, family practice, and general practice). ACMET II gauged views on primary care and specialist medical careers, factors affecting residency choice, faculty influences on medical students and residents, and time spent in various settings (inpatient, outpatient, emergency ward, managed care, and long-term care settings) during electives, clerkships, internships, and residency. Background information collected by the survey includes age, sex, marital status, race, medical school debt, and medical specialty.
Curated
Partially restricted

National Survey of Primary Care Physicians and Nurse Practitioners, 2012 (ICPSR 36050)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2011-11-23--2012-04-09
The focus of this survey was the role of nurse practitioners and physicians in primary care and the likely effects on the health care system of expanding the supply of nurse practitioners and their scope of practice. Topics of the survey include satisfaction with career, daily roles and responsibilities, perceived affects of increasing the supply of NPs, attitudes toward NP scope of practice, information on clinical practice services and revenue, and respondent demographics and income.
Curated

Prescription for Health Evaluation: Practice Information Form Data, 2005-2007 [United States] (ICPSR 27041)

Released/updated on: 2010-06-23
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-01-01--2007-01-01

Prescription for Health was an initiative funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in collaboration with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Under this initiative, primary care practice-based research networks (PBRNs) -- groups of ambulatory practices devoted principally to the primary care of patients -- developed, tested, and evaluated innovative strategies to improve the delivery and effectiveness of health behavior change services in primary care practice. The strategies targeted four health risk behaviors: tobacco use, unhealthy diet, lack of physical activity, and risky alcohol use. Prescription for Health was conducted in two rounds. Round one awarded grants to 17 PBRNs to test the feasibility of implementing the strategies, while round two awarded grants to ten PBRNs to measure the strategies' effectiveness and the expenses associated with them. More than a 100 primary care practices from the ten PBRNs participated in the evaluation.

This data collection comprises the data from one of the data collection efforts carried out by the second round: the responses to the Practice Information Form (PIF), a Web-based instrument which captured key organizational attributes of the participating practices. The PIF data were collected at two time points. Baseline data were collected from each practice before the intervention was implemented and follow-up data were collected approximately one year after the start of the intervention.

Information about the practices collected by the PIF include practice type and ownership; characteristics of each clinician and non-clinician staff person; number of vacancies for clinicians and non clinicians; number of exam rooms and volume of office visits; average number of new patients per month; percentages of patients in various age, race, Hispanic origin, and payer categories; and the predominant type of payment arrangement with health plans. In addition, the PIF asked whether a specific health plan controlled over half of the practice's total business; whether the practice had a pay-for-performance program; whether any payers or organizations publicly reported practice level performance information, such as patient satisfaction, chronic care/disease management, and/or preventive service delivery; and whether practices had a formal process for routinely measuring satisfaction among patients, clinicians, and other staff. The PIF also investigated how practices motivated their clinicians and staff; the level of competition among practices in local markets; the use of computers, electronic medical record systems, and patient registries; major changes that affected each practice's ability to make improvements in patient care; factors that prevented practices from translating the results of research into changes in medical practice; and the use of health risk assessment protocols or questionnaires to identify patients who may benefit from counseling or interventions. Questions about the four Prescription for Health behaviors -- physical activity, healthy eating, smoking cessation, and addressing risky drinking -- asked how practices linked patients to outside resources for each of the four behaviors; how practices used evidence-based guidelines and informed patients about recommendations for the behaviors; and which approaches practices used to support patients ready to engage in a behavior change for each of the behaviors.

Curated

Process Evaluation of an In-person Versus Webinar Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination Quality Improvement Program (Illinois, Michigan and Washington State), 2015-2016 (ICPSR 36757)

Released/updated on: 2017-09-28
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-01-01--2016-01-01

These data were collected as part of an assessment of in-person and webinar AFIX consultations on best practices for adolescent HPV immunization. AFIX (which stands for Assessment, Feedback, Incentives, and eXchange) is a program of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention aimed at increasing vaccination of children and adolescents by reducing missed opportunities to vaccinate and improving immunization delivery practices at the provider level.

High-volume primary care clinics serving over 370,000 patients ages 11-17 in three states were randomly assigned to receive no consultation or an in-person or webinar AFIX consultation focused on improving adolescent HPV immunization. Immunization specialists from participating state health departments delivered the consultations. Physicians, nurses and other clinic staff in the in-person and webinar arms who participated in the consultation sessions completed web-based surveys pre-consultation (pre-visit survey), post-consultation (post-visit survey) and at six-month follow up (follow-up survey). Topics covered by the surveys include participation in and satisfaction with the assigned consultation delivery mode; strategies for improving HPV vaccination coverage used by the respondents' clinics; opinions about the level of HPV vaccination coverage in the respondents' clinics; and the respondents' self-efficacy for improving HPV vaccination coverage.

Back to top