Objective. Pneumococcal vaccination is important for patients taking immunosuppressive medications, but prior studies suggest that most patients do not undergo vaccination. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a point-of-care paper reminder form as a quality improvement (QI) strategy to increase the numbers of immunosuppressed patients being kept up-to-date with pneumococcal vaccination in a rheumatology practice.Methods. Selected rheumatologists at 5 ambulatory practice sites received a point-of-care paper reminder form to be applied to patients who were not up-to-date with pneumococcal vaccination. Interrupted time-series analyses were used to measure the effect of the intervention on the pneumococcal vaccination rates among patients, comparing the rates in the intervention group with those in a control group of rheumatologists who did not receive the intervention. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were examined to identify independent predictors of being up-to-date with pneumococcal vaccination.Results. We evaluated a total of 3,717 patients (66.0% with rheumatoid arthritis) who were taking immunosuppressive medications (74.1% women, mean age 53.7 years). Rheumatologists who received the intervention had a significant increase in the rate of patients who were up-to-date with pneumococcal vaccination, from 67.6% to 80.0% (P ‫؍‬ 0.006), in the time period following the intervention, compared to a rate that remained stable, from 52.3% to 52.0% (P ‫؍‬ 0.90), among patients in the nonintervention control group during this same time period. In regression models, positive predictors of being up-to-date with pneumococcal vaccination at the patient level included the following: having received the intervention (hazard ratio Conclusion. A QI strategy involving a simple point-of-care paper reminder form significantly increased the rate of being up-to-date with pneumococcal vaccination among patients receiving immunosuppressive medications in our rheumatology practices over a 6-month period.[

The proportion of patients who are up to date with documented pneumococcal vaccination was suboptimal in our rheumatology practice. The ability to continuously repeat electronic measurement permits us to initiate continuous quality improvement efforts.

Background. Influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations are recommended for elderly and high-risk patients; however, rates of adherence are low. We sought to implement influenza and pneumococcal vaccine initiatives in 4 different ambulatory specialty practices, using 3 unique approaches.Methods. Four specialties with high-risk patient populations were selected for intervention: allergy (asthma), infectious disease (ID) (human immunodeficiency virus), pulmonary (chronic lung disease), and rheumatology (immunocompromised). Allergy and ID focused on influenza vaccination, and pulmonary and rheumatology focused on pneumococcal vaccination. We used 3 strategies for quality improvement: physician reminders, patient letters, and a nurse-driven model. Physicians were provided their performance data on a monthly basis and presented trended data on a quarterly basis at staff meetings.Results. All 4 specialties developed processes for improving vaccination rates with all showing some increase. Higher rates were achieved with pneumococcal vaccine than influenza. Pneumococcal vaccine rates showed steady improvement from year to year while influenza vaccine rates remained relatively constant. Allergy's influenza rate was 59% in 2011 and 64% in the 2014 flu season. Infectious disease influenza rates moved from 74% in the 2011 flu season to 86% for the 2014 season. Pneumococcal vaccine in pulmonary patients' rate was 52% at the start of intervention in February 2009 and 79% as of January 2015. Rheumatology rates rose from 50% in February 2009 to 87% in January 2015.Conclusions. Integrated routine workflow and performance data sharing can effectively engage specialists and staff in vaccine adherence improvement. Influenza vaccination may require other approaches to achieve the rates seen with pneumococcal vaccine.

BackgroundIndividuals with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), even when asymptomatic, are at‐risk for sudden cardiac death and stroke from arrhythmias, making it imperative to identify individuals affected by this familial disorder. Consensus guidelines recommend that first‐degree relatives (FDRs) of a person with HCM undergo serial cardiovascular evaluations.MethodsWe determined the uptake of family screening in patients with HCM and developed an online video intervention to facilitate family communication and screening. Family screening and genetic testing data were collected through a prospective quality improvement initiative, a standardized clinical assessment and management plan (SCAMP), utilized in an established cardiovascular genetics clinic. Patients were prescribed an online video if screening of their FDRs was incomplete and a pilot study on video utilization and family communication was conducted.ResultsTwo‐hundred and sixteen probands with HCM were enrolled in SCAMP Phase I and 190 were enrolled in SCAMP Phase II. In both phases, probands reported that 51% of FDRs had been screened (382/749 in Phase I, 258/504 in Phase II). Twenty patients participated in a pilot study on video utilization and family communication. Nine participants reported watching the video and six participants reported sharing the video with relatives; however only one participant reported sharing the video with relatives who were not yet aware of the diagnosis of HCM in the family.ConclusionDespite care in a specialized cardiovascular genetics clinic, approximately one half of FDRs of patients with HCM remained unscreened. Online interventions and videos may serve as supplemental tools for patients communicating genetic risk information to relatives.

Quality improvement in health care today requires a comprehensive approach. Improvement efforts led by patients, payers, regulators, or health care providers face many barriers. Obstacles include selecting measures with clinical value, building physician acceptance, establishing routine and efficient measurement, and resolving competing clinical demands and work flow impediments. To meet these challenges, the Brigham and Women's Hospital Department of Medicine created a grassroots quality program guided by four main principles: improvement is led by frontline clinicians who select measures important to their patients, performance measurement is automated and accurate, appropriate resources are provided, and interventions are system based and without financial incentives for individual providers. The quality program has engaged the department's physicians from the start. Given the flexibility to define their own metrics according to their patients' needs, clinicians have selected measures related to prevention and wellness, which are often based on national standards. The central quality team facilitates measurement and reporting while providers focus on patient care. The subsequent production of meaningful, actionable data has been instrumental in building physician acceptance and in providing clinicians the opportunity to evaluate and monitor performance. The program's largest challenges have been in capturing meaningful data from electronic systems. The program's system-based focus encourages providers to develop solutions within the existing framework of clinic resources, primarily targeting work flows and processes, while minimizing large expenditures on additional staffing.