Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the single largest cause of death in the developed countries and is one of the leading causes of disease burden in developing countries. In 2001, there were 7.3 million deaths due to CHD worldwide. Three-fourths of global deaths due to CHD occurred in the low and middle-income countries. The rapid rise in CHD burden in most of the low and middle and income countries is due to socio-economic changes, increase in life span and acquisition of lifestyle related risk factors. The CHD death rate, however, varies dramatically across the developing countries. The varying incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates reflect the different levels of risk factors, other competing causes of death, availability of resources to combat CVD, and the stage of epidemiologic transition that each country or region finds itself. The economic burden of CHD is equally large but solutions exist to manage this growing burden.

These findings suggest that gastric bypass-induced weight loss may unmask an underlying beta cell defect or contribute to pathological islet hyperplasia, perhaps via glucagon-like peptide 1-mediated pathways.

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Recent US health care reforms incentivize improved population health outcomes and primary care functions. It remains unclear how much improving primary care physician supply can improve population health, independent of other health care and socioeconomic factors. OBJECTIVES To identify primary care physician supply changes across US counties from 2005-2015 and associations between such changes and population mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This epidemiological study evaluated US population data and individual-level claims data linked to mortality from 2005 to 2015 against changes in primary care and specialist physician supply from 2005 to 2015. Data from 3142 US counties, 7144 primary care service areas, and 306 hospital referral regions were used to investigate the association of primary care physician supply with changes in life expectancy and cause-specific mortality after adjustment for health care, demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral covariates. Analysis was performed from March to July 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Age-standardized life expectancy, cause-specific mortality, and restricted mean survival time. RESULTS Primary care physician supply increased from 196 014 physicians in 2005 to 204 419 in 2015. Owing to disproportionate losses of primary care physicians in some counties and population increases, the mean (SD) density of primary care physicians relative to population size decreased from 46.6 per 100 000 population (95% CI, 0.0-114.6 per 100 000 population) to 41.4 per 100 000 population (95% CI, 0.0-108.6 per 100 000 population), with greater losses in rural areas. In adjusted mixed-effects regressions, every 10 additional primary care physicians per 100 000 population was associated with a 51.5-day increase in life expectancy (95% CI, 29.5-73.5 days; 0.2% increase), whereas an increase in 10 specialist physicians per 100 000 population corresponded to a 19.2-day increase (95% CI, 7.0-31.3 days). A total of 10 additional primary care physicians per 100 000 population was associated with reduced cardiovascular, cancer, and respiratory mortality by 0.9% to 1.4%. Analyses at different geographic levels, using instrumental variable regressions, or at the individual level found similar benefits associated with primary care supply. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Greater primary care physician supply was associated with lower mortality, but per capita supply decreased between 2005 and 2015. Programs to explicitly direct more resources to primary care physician supply may be important for population health.

Current PCMH demonstration projects with external payment reform include large numbers of patients and physicians as well as a wide spectrum of implementation models. Key questions exist around the adequacy of current payment mechanisms and evaluation plans as public and policy interest in the PCMH model grows.

Primary health care (PHC) has been recognized as a core component of effective health systems since the early part of the twentieth century. However, despite notable progress, there remains a large gap between what individuals and communities need, and the quality and effectiveness of care delivered. The Primary Health Care Performance Initiative (PHCPI) was established by an international consortium to catalyze improvements in PHC delivery and outcomes in low- and middle-income countries through better measurement and sharing of effective models and practices. PHCPI has developed a framework to illustrate the relationship between key financing, workforce, and supply inputs, and core primary health care functions of first-contact accessibility, comprehensiveness, coordination, continuity, and person-centeredness. The framework provides guidance for more effective assessment of current strengths and gaps in PHC delivery through a core set of 25 key indicators (“Vital Signs”). Emerging best practices that foster high-performing PHC system development are being codified and shared around low- and high-income countries. These measurement and improvement approaches provide countries and implementers with tools to assess the current state of their PHC delivery system and to identify where cross-country learning can accelerate improvements in PHC quality and effectiveness.

Suboptimal blood pressure is responsible for a large and an increasing economic and health burden in developing countries. Although the majority of the current absolute expenditure occurs in the high-income countries, an ever-increasing proportion of the cost is going to be carried by developing countries.

Most electronic health records today need further development of features that patient-centered medical homes require to improve their efficiency, quality, and safety. We propose a road map of the domains that need to be addressed to achieve these results. We believe that the development of electronic health records will be critical in seven major areas: telehealth, measurement of quality and efficiency, care transitions, personal health records, and, most important, registries, team care, and clinical decision support for chronic diseases. To encourage this development, policy makers should include medical homes in emerging electronic health record regulations. Additionally, more research is needed to learn how these records can enhance team care.