0
View Post
November Workgroups Highlight Mobile Health and Patient Storytelling

November Workgroups Highlight Mobile Health and Patient Storytelling

In November, MVC hosted two virtual workgroup presentations – the first, a rural health workgroup, featured Hillsdale Hospital’s mobile health unit initiative. The second, a post-discharge follow-up workgroup, continued a presentation started at MVC’s February 2025 health in action workgroup on patient journey mapping and introduced a joint patient storytelling project by Healthy Behavior Optimization for Michigan (HBOM) and Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network (MiCR). The MVC Coordinating Center hosts workgroup presentations twice per month covering a variety of topics including post-discharge follow-up, sepsis, cardiac rehab, rural health, preoperative testing and health in action.

Rural Health Workgroup – Hillsdale Hospital 

The first workgroup of the month provided a review of Hillsdale Hospital’s mobile health unit, which aims to deliver essential health services to patients living in rural communities who may otherwise struggle physically or financially to reach traditional care settings.

As Lindsey Crouch, Director of Outpatient Clinics, Home Care, and Durable Medical Equipment for Hillsdale Hospital explained, rural communities face higher health outcome variation, transportation issues, limited accessibility to primary care providers, and high unnecessary emergency department (ED) utilization (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Hillsdale County Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) Survey Data: Difficulty Finding or Getting Transportation to a Doctor in 2024, 2022, 2019, and 2016

vertical bar graph: Hillsdale County Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) Survey Data: Difficulty Finding or Getting Transportation to a Doctor in 2024, 2022, 2019, and 2016

During the Covid-19 pandemic, Hillsdale County’s health department purchased a mobile health unit in an effort to close the gap in healthcare access for their community. However, despite continued need, utilization of the mobile unit has waned in recent years.

Hillsdale Hospital aimed to revitalize the mobile health unit to:

  1. Bridge access gaps in rural areas. For many rural residents, distance to hospitals or clinics, limited transportation, and infrastructure challenges can hinder timely access to care. A mobile health unit can bring services to patients rather than requiring patients to travel long distances. This helps to reduce one significant non-medical barrier to care.
  2. Focus on preventive and ongoing care. The mobile unit’s design supports not just acute care, but preventive services — screenings, check-ups, chronic disease management — especially helpful for rural populations that may have higher chronic disease burden and less frequent access to routine care.
  3. Address gaps in health outcomes between communities. By delivering care directly to underserved communities, this model aligns with broader efforts to ensure that where a person lives does not determine whether they receive high-value, quality healthcare.

Throughout this program, Hillsdale Hospital aimed to improve health outcome variation with a goal to achieve a 15% improvement in selected chronic disease metrics (e.g., blood pressure control) while also establishing partnerships with local organizations for sustainability.

Throughout the presentation and follow-up discussion, participants addressed several key considerations related to implementing and operating the mobile health unit including:

  • Logistical planning & scheduling. Which rural towns or areas will be served? How often do visits occur? How to communicate the schedule to residents to maximize utilization?
  • Service offerings. What mix of services beyond basic triage should be included? Considerations may include screenings, chronic disease management, preventive care, and referrals when needed to ensure the mobile unit meaningfully supplements local rural healthcare capacity.
  • Coordination with local providers. What existing local hospitals, clinics, and community health organizations should be involved to ensure continuity of care? Consider these, especially follow-up and referrals, for more advanced services.
  • Addressing rural-specific challenges. What unique barriers impact your community? Consider transportation, limited staffing, and supply chain constraints.

Hillsdale Hospital’s mobile health unit embodies a vision for bringing high-value, high-quality care to rural Michigan. By lowering access barriers and delivering preventive and ongoing services directly to patients in their communities, this initiative can help improve health outcomes, reduce reliance on emergency services, and foster trust in healthcare among rural residents.

Insights from this workgroup have several practical implications for other rural hospitals and provider organizations across Michigan:

  • Expansion is possible through mobile care. Rural hospitals can leverage mobile health units as an extension of their current clinical outreach, helping to connect with populations that may rarely visit brick-and-mortar facilities.
  • Support chronic disease management. By delivery of routine care and screenings, mobile units can help stabilize chronic conditions earlier, reducing acute exacerbations and potentially reducing avoidable ED visits.
  • Enhance care coordination. Partnering with mobile health teams and community resources can help coordinate follow-up appointments, testing, and specialty referrals to create a more continuous care experience for rural patients.
  • Advance population health goals. Mobile services can function as a tool within a hospital’s broader population health strategy, align with value-based initiatives, community health needs assessments, and provide the opportunity for all people to achieve optimal health goals.
  • Gather meaningful community insights. Regular presence in rural communities can help hospitals better understand local barriers, non-medical drivers of health, and other care gaps which may inform program planning, grant proposals, and collaborative partnerships.

MVC Rural Health Workgroup: Nov. 4, 2025

Post-Discharge Follow-Up Workgroup – MVC and HBOM

The second MVC workgroup of November featured a joint presentation by MVC’s Associate Program Manager, Jana Stewart, MPH and HBOM’s Informatics Design Lead, Noa Kim, MSI. The workgroup kicked off with an overview of the rationale behind placing a greater emphasis on post-discharge follow-up – particularly how timely and effective follow-up care can reduce readmissions, improve patient outcomes, and ease transitions from inpatient to outpatient or home settings.

Next, as a continuation of the February 2025  health in action workgroup presentation on patient journey mapping, Stewart showed how mapping can be used to highlight key moments in a coronary heart failure (CHF) patient’s journey where there may be opportunities for post-discharge care coordination improvement – e.g., medication reconciliation, patient knowledge, frequent rehospitalization, low follow-up rates, and lack of social and community support.

An important strategy for combating these challenges for CHF patients is engagement in cardiac rehabilitation. And yet, patients rarely optimize this opportunity. Patient storytelling can help patients recall details, model scenarios a patient may experience in the future, and reduce the burden of information provided during a visit and may be a strategy to optimize cardiac rehab enrollment.

Under the umbrella of Michigan Cardiac Rehab (MiCR), a collaboration between the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2), MVC, and HBOM, several initiatives have been developed aimed at optimizing guideline-directed medical therapy including the development of NewBeat materials and now the Heart-to-Heart storytelling campaign (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Examples of MiCR Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Campaigns

NewBeat materials and the Heart-to-Heart storytelling campaign

As Kim explained, the goals of the Heart-to-Heart project are to collect diverse first-person accounts of cardiac rehab in video, audio, and photo formats from patients and clinicians from across Michigan to produce a compelling, free, reusable story library for use by cardiac rehab advocates across Michigan and beyond.

For hospitals and health systems across Michigan seeking to improve post-discharge outcomes, insights from this workgroup offer the following next steps:

  1. Use journey mapping and storytelling in quality improvement. By mapping patient journeys and capturing patient experiences, providers can better identify and address systemic barriers to safe discharge and recovery.
  2. Adopt standardized discharge-to-follow-up workflows. Hospitals should ensure that discharge planning includes scheduling follow-up appointments, medication reconciliation, and clear communication of next steps before patients leave the hospital.
  3. Prioritize high-risk patients for post-discharge support. Patients with chronic illness, limited social support, or social determinants that might hinder recovery deserve extra attention during discharge planning and follow-up scheduling.
  4. Assign care coordinators or navigators. Especially for high-risk or complex patients, dedicated staff to oversee follow-up care – manage appointments, support communication, track adherence, and offer resources – may reduce readmissions and improve outcomes.
  5. Leverage post-discharge care as part of value-based care strategy. Effective follow-up after discharge supports long-term patient health, reduces avoidable costs, and aligns with goals of high-value care frameworks.

MVC Post-Discharge Follow-Up Workgroup: Nov. 20, 2025

If you are interested in pursuing a healthcare quality improvement project, MVC has data specialists available to help you navigate our data resources and create custom analytics reports to support your efforts. Please reach out to us by email [LINK] if you would like to learn more about MVC data or engagement offerings!

0
View Post
Highlights from the 4th Annual Michigan Cardiac Rehabilitation Network (MiCR) In-Person Meeting in Troy, MI

Highlights from the 4th Annual Michigan Cardiac Rehabilitation Network (MiCR) In-Person Meeting in Troy, MI

The Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network (MiCR) held its fourth annual in-person meeting at Corewell Health East in Troy, MI on Nov. 13, 2025. The full slide deck is now available [LINK]. Opening the meeting’s agenda was Mike Thompson, PhD, MPH, co-director of MiCR and senior advisor at MVC. He welcomed attendees to the Corewell Health Beaumont Troy campus, announced the finalization of MiCR’s two-year strategic plan (Figure 1), and shared that Henry Ford Hospital was receiving the final MiCR Cardiac Rehabilitation Utilization Award mini grant to support their QUASAR project, which pilots a hub-and-spoke telehealth model for cardiac rehabilitation (CR) delivery. He also highlighted renewed engagement of the MiCR Advisory Council and ongoing collaboration with the Healthy Behavior Optimization for Michigan (HBOM) team to collect patient stories.

Figure 1. 2025-2027 MiCR Operational and Strategic Framework

MiCR framework: data analytics/benchmarking, collaboration & learning, QI support, MiCR impact & engagement

Dr. Thompson described MiCR’s strategic initiatives in two key areas: telehealth and medication management. For telehealth, MiCR is employing a multi-pronged approach that includes surveys, qualitative interviews, and stakeholder outreach to understand the current state, implementation plans, and barriers to telehealth CR implementation in Michigan. This effort will also include an evaluation of the value and utilization of existing resources that support telehealth CR. In the realm of medication management, MiCR is using claims data to assess variability in medication adherence among CR participants and applying surveys, interviews, and outreach to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement. These efforts will lead to actionable plans designed to help stakeholders implement initiatives that elevate CR services across the state.

MiCR/HBOM Heart-to Heart Collaboration Update

Larrea Young, MDes, a human-centered design project manager at HBOM, announced the launch of Heart-to-Heart, a new initiative designed to inspire both patients and providers by collecting and sharing diverse stories of patient experiences with CR. The goal of this effort is to foster broader conversations about the life-changing impact of CR and encourage patient enrollment by providing strong peer endorsements. The HBOM and MiCR teams are gathering first-person accounts in video, audio, and photo formats to create an engaging, free, and reusable story library for CR advocates across Michigan and beyond. Progress so far includes 10 patient interviews at two sites, representing a wide range of demographics and experiences. HBOM previewed a clip from a patient interview at the meeting. Clinicians were also encouraged to contribute to the effort by sharing voice messages about cardiac rehabilitation through Speakpipe.

Leveraging National CR Quality Improvement (QI): Efforts, Updates, and Next Steps

Megan Gross, MPH, CHES, ACSM-CEP, EIM, clinical exercise physiologist at Holland Hospital and board director of the Michigan Society for Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (MSCVPR), shared a summary of national CR QI efforts and discussed how her organization has leveraged these initiatives to advance local QI projects. She identified tools and resources, advocacy, and QI champions as the core “pillars” of quality improvement, all supported by a foundation of data. Gross highlighted nationally available resources such as the Million Hearts/American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (AACVPR) Cardiac Rehab Change Package and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s (AHRQ) TAKEheart initiative, as well as ongoing advocacy, research, and publications. Encouraging all CR program staff to view themselves as champions, she transitioned to describe how Holland Hospital has applied these tools in their own QI efforts, concluding with a description of their project to implement an inpatient liaison model aimed at increasing CR participation.

Understanding the Physiologic and Clinical Significance of Metabolic Equivalents (METS)

Barry Franklin, PhD, a director emeritus of preventive cardiology and cardiac rehabilitation at Corewell Health East, gave a presentation explaining the physiological and clinical significance of metabolic equivalents (METs). Dr. Franklin summarized key lessons from his 50-year career in clinical exercise physiology, highlighting topics such as energy systems for exercise, acute cardiorespiratory responses (VO2 max), METs, anaerobic (ventilatory) threshold, fitness and mortality, fitness in relation to surgical outcomes and health care costs, and clinical considerations for prescribing exercise intensity. Dr. Franklin’s key take home message related to his guidelines and recommendations for moving patients from achievement of lower to higher METs through CR participation.

Sustaining Cardiac Rehab Through Health System Integration

Brett Reynolds, MPH, ACSM-CEP, and Cindy Haskin-Popp, MS, ACSM-CEP, of Corewell Health East shared their multi-year journey to build a fully integrated CR service line after the Corewell Health merger. They detailed key phases from planning and collaboration, such as forming committees, aligning workflows, and engaging stakeholders, to implementation, which involved developing communication channels, Epic workflow training, and designating super users for consistency. Post-integration successes included cross-training, improved communication, standardized competencies, and better patient care (Figure 2), while ongoing challenges remain in areas like documentation and order set variation. Looking forward, the team aims to pursue AACVPR accreditation, standardize patient education, and create a centralized referral process to further improve care quality and patient experience.

Figure 2. Corewell Health System CR Post-Integration Outcomes

Corewell Health System CR post-integration outcomes: wins

Medication Management Breakout Session

Following lunch, MVC Project Manager Emily Woltmann, PhD, MSW, led attendees through an interactive breakout session that explored roles, responsibilities, and strategies related to medication management in CR. Participants met in small groups to discuss strategies and barriers to addressing medication management issues with their CR patients (Figure 3). The information gathered will be used by the MiCR team to help drive forward the MiCR medication management strategic initiative.

Figure 3. MiCR Co-Director Mike Thompson facilitating a medication management breakout discussion

Data Presentation and Panel Discussion on CR Completion Rates

Dr. Thompson led a session utilizing MVC claims data, which shared aggregate and unblinded data on CR completion rates across Michigan. This included a summary of the proportion of participating patients who finished the widely recommended 36 sessions, as well as those who completed at least 12 or 24 sessions. The findings revealed substantial variability among cardiac rehabilitation programs based on both metrics, with completion rates for the full 36 sessions ranging from 0% to 50% at CR programs across Michigan.

A subsequent panel discussion moderated by Dr. Thompson included Amy Poindexter, BS, CEP, CR manager at Trinity Health Ann Arbor and Livingston Hospitals, Amber Steele, BS, ACSM-CEP, CR lead at McLaren Bay Region Hospital, and David Running, BS, ACSM-CEP, CEPA, supervisor of CR at University of Michigan Health-West. Both the panel and the audience voiced a variety of strategies they use to increase session attendance in CR, such as developing supportive relationships with patients, watching for plateaus in progress, and having completion rituals and celebrations when a patient graduates from CR. The most frequently cited challenges to patients completing an adequate number of sessions were barriers related to the travel distance to CR programs and medical insurance copays.

AACVPR President Stacey Greenway Presents Keynote on AACVPR Strategic Plan

Stacey Greenway, MA, MPH, MAACVPR, ACSM-CEP, the newly elected president of AACVPR, delivered the meeting keynote, highlighting AACVPR’s growing multidisciplinary membership, widely recognized training and certification programs, and enhanced data registry resources for cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation professionals. She outlined the 2026–2028 strategic plan focused on increasing awareness and engagement, advancing innovative delivery models like telehealth, and strengthening research and outcomes through a national network. Greenway encouraged MiCR members to participate nationally via opportunities such as the AACVPR quality improvement cohort, day on the hill, and legislative advocacy, and she invited involvement in content submission and session proposals for the 2026 Annual Meeting in San Antonio, TX.

Conclusion and Next Steps

Dr. Jessica Golbus, MD, MS, Co-Director of MiCR, wrapped up the meeting with a summary of the day’s key points and next steps. She shared that a follow-up email will be sent in the coming weeks and announced the dates for MVC cardiac rehabilitation virtual workgroups scheduled for 12 p.m. on Feb. 10, June 9, and Oct. 20 in 2026. The date for MiCR’s spring webinar will be announced soon.

MiCR is a partnership between BMC2 and MVC, the purpose of which is to improve access to, utilization of, and delivery of cardiac rehabilitation services across the state of Michigan. MVC is proud to partner with providers, hospitals, and fellow CQIs in advancing quality initiatives that benefit patients in Michigan. If you have questions about any of the topics discussed at the MiCR annual meeting or are interested in following up for more details on other initiatives, email the MiCR leadership team [EMAIL] or the MVC Coordinating Center [EMAIL].

0
View Post
Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network Spring Meeting Recap

Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network Spring Meeting Recap

Earlier this spring, the Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network (MiCR) hosted its virtual spring meeting with 74 attendees joining from cardiac rehab programs and hospitals across the state. MiCR was glad to host two guest presenters for the meeting, including Alexis Beatty, MD, MAS, Co-Director of the UCSF Cardiac Rehab and Wellness Center, and Brett Reynolds, MPH, ACSM, CEP, Supervisor of Cardiology for Corewell Health East. The primary goal of MiCR meetings is to support shared learning, practice sharing, and networking among professionals working with cardiac rehabilitation programs across Michigan.

The meeting began with MiCR team updates provided by Co-Director Mike Thompson, PhD – most notably the introduction of Dr. Jessie Golbus, MD, MS, as the new co-director of MiCR (see Figure 1). Dr. Golbus is an Assistant Professor of Internal Medicine in the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine at Michigan Medicine.

Figure 1.

MiCR updates including leadership change and MiCR/HBOM grant received

Dr. Thompson also announced a new grant from the University of Michigan's Frankel Cardiovascular Center awarded to Healthy Behavior Optimization for Michigan (HBOM) and MiCR for their new Heart-to-Heart initiative. Heart-to-Heart is a new initiative aiming to amplify the real, diverse voices of Michigan patients who have experienced cardiac rehabilitation. Patient stories told through compelling audio, visual, and written storytelling will foster broader conversations about the life-changing impact of cardiac rehabilitation and inspire those considering attendance. HBOM and MiCR previously partnered on the development of NewBeat materials. Following the virtual meeting, BMC2 published a blog introducing the new Heart-to-Heart initiative.

Dr. Thompson then provided insights into improvements in cardiac rehabilitation utilization in Michigan since the inception of MiCR. The network is committed to boosting enrollment to 40% across all eligible conditions except heart failure, for which it has a lower target of 10% enrollment. Dr. Thompson noted encouraging trends observed since 2020, with overall enrollment rising to 35% from just under 25%. Although heart failure patient enrollment remains low at approximately 4%, efforts are under way to improve enrollment in this population in the future.

Dr. Alexis Beatty, MD, MAS, co-director of the UCSF Cardiac Rehab and Wellness Center, delivered the first guest presentation on the transformative potential of telehealth in cardiac rehabilitation. She highlighted the advantages and potential of integrating telehealth and hybrid models with traditional center-based programming to increase accessibility and participation (see Figure 2). Since adopting a hybrid model during the COVID-19 pandemic, UCSF reported substantially improved completion rates in virtual and hybrid programs compared to exclusively in-person sessions. Furthermore, patient outcomes related to exercise capacity, risk factor management, and quality of life were consistent across all formats.

Figure 2.

current in-person cardiac rehab enrollment of 29% of eligible people compared to future goal of 70% of eligible people enrolled in four participation options for cardiac rehab

Dr. Beatty also introduced an online delivery model toolkit (available at UCSF Cardiac Rehab Toolkit), crafted using human-centered design methods to aid in telehealth program development. This toolkit includes adaptable templates for exercises and safety and is already utilized by clinics in Michigan and beyond, allowing for flexibility to meet local patient needs. Dr. Beatty’s full slide presentation is available online.

In the second presentation, Brett Reynolds, MPH, ACSM, CEP, supervisor of cardiology at Corewell Health East, showcased their "Weight of Heart Failure" quality improvement initiative. Funded by a MiCR mini grant, the project sought to improve engagement and outcomes for heart failure patients. This initiative was a response to declining cardiac rehabilitation enrollments among heart failure patients. Grant funds were used to purchase 100 Corewell Health-branded scales for daily weight monitoring, accompanied by educational materials to aid in health management. The project also included follow-up calls two weeks post-discharge to verify if patients were monitoring their weight and had scheduled follow-up appointments.

Reynolds reported that of the 156 heart failure patients reached, 110 follow-up calls were completed, with 65% consistently tracking their weight and 83% scheduling follow-up appointments. This proactive approach seemed to have contributed to an increase in participation.

Despite the success, Reynolds acknowledged persistent challenges, such as referral system barriers and limited physician awareness regarding cardiac rehabilitation eligibility for heart failure. However, the initiative's efficacy in enhancing follow-up care and patient involvement highlighted the potential impact of targeted interventions in heart failure management. The full Corewell Health slide presentation is available online.

The webinar concluded with announcements of upcoming opportunities to engage with the network and collaborate to improve cardiac rehabilitation care in Michigan. Most notable among these opportunities is MiCR’s upcoming in-person fall meeting, which is set to take place on Thurs., Nov. 13 at Corewell Health Troy. Those interested in attending can register now.

0
View Post
MVC Updates Registry with New Claims Across All Payers

MVC Updates Registry with New Claims Across All Payers

This week MVC updated its registry with new claims from its included payers. This most recent update included the addition of three new months of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) and Blue Care Network (BCN) claims, one new quarter of Medicaid claims, and one new quarter of Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims. Following these updates, the MVC registry now has the following data ranges for its data:

  • BCBSM PPO (Commercial and Medicare Advantage): 01/01/2015 – 03/31/2025 (index events through 12/31/2024)
  • BCN (Commercial and Medicare Advantage): 01/01/2015 – 03/31/2025 (index events through 12/31/2024)
  • Medicaid: 01/01/2015 – 03/31/2025 (index events through 12/31/2024)
  • Medicare FFS: 01/01/2015 – 09/30/2024 (index events through 06/30/2024)

Anytime MVC publishes new data on its registry, the newest claims for each payer are incorporated throughout the various reports and dashboards where that payer’s data is present, including the interactive multi-payer reports for cardiac rehabilitation utilization and preoperative testing.

Refreshed Multi-Payer Cardiac Rehabilitation Reports

The multi-payer cardiac rehabilitation utilization reports were added to the registry in the first half of 2024 and have replaced the static PDF hospital-level push reports MVC previously distributed biannually to its members as well as BMC2 and MSTCVS contacts. The regular release of new data on the registry, therefore, gives members opportunities throughout the year to check progress on cardiac rehabilitation metrics more regularly and find opportunities for improvement. For example, available 2024 data on cardiac rehabilitation enrollment for all eligible patients (excluding heart failure patients) with episode start dates between Jan. 1, 2024, and Dec. 31, 2024, indicates wide variability among hospitals; the statewide average utilization rate is 34%, with the majority of sites observing rates below the Million Hearts recommended 70% rate as well as below the Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network goal rate of 40% (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Statewide Rankings for Cardiac Rehab Utilization within 90 Days After Discharge from AMI, CABG, PCI, SAVR, and TAVR, 1/1/2024-12/31/2024*

Dot graph: Statewide Rankings for Cardiac Rehab Utilization within 90 Days After Discharge from AMI, CABG, PCI, SAVR, and TAVR, 1/1/2024-12/31/2024*

*Index events 1/1/24-12/31/24 for BCBSM Commercial and Medicare Advantage (MA), BCN Commercial and MA, and Medicaid; index events 1/1/24-6/30/24 for Medicare FFS

Similarly, there is significant variation between hospitals in their mean days to a patient’s first cardiac rehab appointment, with some hospital patients attending their first session 31 days after discharge and some waiting as long as 68 days. However, MVC has observed a steady yearly decrease over time in this metric, with a collaborative-wide average of 59 days in 2020 compared to 47 days in 2024.

These data along with metrics for mean number of visits and utilization rates for specific service lines and payers can be accessed via the multi-payer tab on the registry under the cardiac rehab heading.

Refreshed Multi-Payer Preoperative Testing Reports

The multi-payer preoperative testing utilization reports were added to the registry at the end of 2024 and have also replaced static hospital-level push reports that were previously distributed as biannual PDF reports to members as well as MSQC contacts. Looking at all available 2024 claims across payers, there is evidence of a small decrease in the MVC All rate of preoperative testing prior to low-risk surgery beginning in late 2022 through 2024 (Figure 2). The average testing rate in 2020 was 46.8% and the average rate in 2024 was 39.9%. Members whose rates are 40% overall or higher are eligible to participate in the RIght-sizing Testing before Elective Surgery (RITE-Size) program, which offers participating sites consultation and coaching, templates, best practice guidance, and other resources to help coordinate decreases in unnecessary testing across their institutions. MVC is also able to supplement registry data with custom analytics by an MVC analyst to meet the needs of members. One such site recently utilized MVC’s custom analytics to identify differences in preoperative testing rates by physician NPI to support conversations about intra-hospital variation by provider and service line.

Figure 2. Statewide Rate of Preoperative Testing and Relative Difference in Preoperative Testing by Quarter, 01/01/2020-12/31/2024*

Line graph: Statewide Rate of Preoperative Testing and Relative Difference in Preoperative Testing by Quarter, 01/01/2020-12/31/2024*

*Index events 1/1/24-12/31/24 for BCBSM Commercial and Medicare Advantage, BCN Commercial and MA, and Medicaid; index events 1/1/24-6/30/24 for Medicare FFS

MVC’s registry contains an extensive collection of report views for multi-payer, P4P, and payer-specific metrics with select patient-level drilldown capabilities. If you are newer to the registry or would like a refresher on how best to leverage the information, reach out to the MVC Coordinating Center for information about a tailored registry training.

0
View Post
June Workgroups Highlight Organizational Structure Impacts on Cardiac Rehab and Measuring System Quality

June Workgroups Highlight Organizational Structure Impacts on Cardiac Rehab and Measuring System Quality

In June, MVC hosted two virtual workgroup presentations – the first, a cardiac rehab workgroup focused on how healthcare organizational structures impact the effectiveness of cardiac rehab operations. The second workgroup, health in action, was a continuation of the recent MVC spring collaborative-wide meeting (CWM) presentation and discussion on How Should We Measure System Quality? The MVC Coordinating Center hosts workgroup presentations twice per month, covering a variety of topics including post-discharge follow-up, sepsis, cardiac rehab, rural health, preoperative testing and health in action.

Cardiac Rehab Workgroup June 10, 2025

MVC hosted a cardiac rehab workgroup with a presentation by Gregory Scharf, BS, ACSM-CEP, AACVPR-CCRP from MyMichigan Health System. Scharf is the Cardiopulmonary Rehab System Manager for nine cardiac rehab and eight pulmonary rehab programs that serve 25 counties in Michigan. In addition to his role with MyMichigan, Scharf is also the vice president of the northern region of the Michigan Society for Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (MSCVPR). With his experience and knowledge, Scharf shared detailed insight into how healthcare organizational structure impacts the effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation operations.

Organizational Structures & Impact

Many cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation programs experience disjointed connections within healthcare organization structures.  According to a recent MSCVPR state poll, up to 20% of the state’s cardiac rehab (CR) programs were structured under a non-cardiovascular related service. Scharf polled the MVC workgroup audience to see where their cardiac rehab programs fell within their organizational structure and found that out of the 21 responses, 11 sites had their CR program under Cardiology/Cardiovascular service, three under respiratory service, four under cardiopulmonary service, one under diagnostic imaging, one under cardiovascular/neurology, and one did not have an onsite CR program.

Scharf noted that in his experience, many of the structures and managerial roles of cardiac rehab programs varied across sites. Cardiac rehab managers included an obstetrics/emergency room nurse manager, physical therapy manager, respiratory services supervisor, and a cardiovascular services manager who was also the echocardiogram technician. The lack of consistency in who should manage a cardiac rehabilitation program adds to the challenges within the healthcare organizational structure.

Supporting Cardiac & Pulmonary Rehab Programs

How can cardiac rehab be strategically aligned within a system? Main organizational connections for CR programs can be successful if placed under the umbrella of cardiovascular services (testing, heart failure clinic, open heart surgery, structural heart surgery, electrophysiology, and vascular), and rehabilitation services (occupational/physical therapy, etc.). Misalignment may occur if the organization’s strategies and objectives are disconnected between service areas, for example:

  1. Communication breaking down across the system
  2. Advocates for the CR service lack authority for change
  3. There are conflicts between service resources and access to space based on organizational leadership structure (OT/PT/CR)

A challenge for smaller sites may be that their organization is not large enough to support the typical structure of large health systems. At MyMichigan the CR program functions with 30 clinical staff for all sites whereas PT has more than 1,000 clinicians. These kinds of discrepancies may cause programs like cardiac rehab to be placed under misaligned service structures due to convenience (staff availability, resource availability) versus a more appropriate setting.

Important questions to ask about your site’s cardiac rehab program structure:

  1. Who is responsible for your cardiac rehab operations?
  2. Are they responsible for non-cardiac rehab departments as well?
  3. Who are the cardiac rehab subject matter experts (SME) and do they have authority to make changes?

SMEs may vary in experience and knowledge, especially when looking at smaller healthcare sites. These SMEs may only have secondary or limited experience with cardiac rehab services, which can impact how successful the program is. One way to help support staff in these positions is to encourage continuing education programs and certifications related to cardiac rehabilitation.

Understanding the Anatomy of the Referral

Over the past 10 years, MyMichigan has seen a significant increase in referral rates for cardiac rehab. Unfortunately, an increase in referrals does not always equate to an increase in patient participation. Some examples of why this may happen include referral delays, missing referral information (no qualifying diagnosis, or no co-signing MD/DO), or a referral being sent with the patient information but no signed order (inactionable) (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Common Referral Delay Examples

Common Referral Delay Examples

When referrals are completed incorrectly, CR program staff must do the leg work to reconnect with the referring provider and make sure they receive a complete referral for their patient. MyMichigan faxes a Cardiac Rehabilitation (CR) Referral & Evaluation Order back to the referring provider to complete and return before the patient can be seen for cardiac rehab. This extra step can impact patient recovery and create added strain on the workforce for multiple healthcare sites.

MVC Data Analytics Resources & Support

Wanting to take a deeper look at cardiac rehab claims data, MyMichigan Health System collaborated with the MVC team including Emily Bair, Site Engagement Coordinator, Julia Mantey, Sr. Data Analyst, and Jiaying Zhang, Data Analyst. The MVC analysts created custom reports that helped visualize where MyMichigan’s CR patients were being referred to and which patients were being referred to their CR program from external sites.

Looking at MyMichigan sites they found that approximately 94% of the patients that discharged from the MyMichigan Midland Medical Center for any of the Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network (MiCR) Main five Conditions (AMI, PCI, CABG, SAVR, TAVR) ended up staying within the MyMichigan system cardiac rehab program. Additionally, they looked at what locations MyMichigan cardiac rehab patients come from across the state. Approximately 58% of CR patients are internal referrals and 41% are from external referrals, almost doubling patient population in MyMichigan’s cardiac rehab program. This also put a spotlight on how much this system’s cardiac rehab program impacted patient populations of external healthcare sites/systems in the state.

Key Take Aways

  • What internal barriers exist due to your organizational structure?
  • Is communication getting to those that impact change?
  • Understand what steps need to be completed between referral and scheduling the patient appointment
  • Understand the process for referrals that leave the system/site

Health in Action Workgroup June 26, 2025

In late June MVC Director Hari Nathan, MD, PhD presented on how quality could be measured at a system level. This was a continuation from his interactive presentation at our spring CWM earlier this year, How Should We Measure System Quality? This “Part 2” workgroup included breakout groups and focused topics for discussion.

Advantages of Health Systems

Dr. Nathan shared several advantages that health systems have in the world of quality improvement that could be utilized, such as being able to right-size care and services at sites, having internal selective referrals as an option, avoiding low-volume surgeries, creating “focused factories,” disseminating best practices, and being able to have a big impact on attributed populations (Figure 2).

Health systems have the ability to address barriers to care on a larger scale, for example improving electronic health record integration between sites and being able to integrate telehealth across the system. Or by collecting data on various patient populations, a system has the potential to develop and expand its population health program. Utilizing the strengths of a system can benefit individual healthcare sites and improve patient care.

Figure 2. Advantages of Health Systems

Advantages of Health Systems

It is important to begin challenging systems to become more than just a sum of their parts – rather, to function as a cohesive unit. How do we create the right incentives for hospital systems to improve quality and costs? What metrics should be measured? These are just a few of the questions posed by Dr. Nathan as the workgroup audience prepared to go into breakout session discussions.

At MVC’s spring CWM in May of this year, audience members were asked “What is your organization doing at a system-level that you would want to be measured on and/or receive credit for improving?”. The most popular responses included: CMS 5 Star Measures, balancing length of stay (LOS) and readmissions, infection prevention, and sepsis outcomes (LOS, readmissions, mortality/end of life care).

Based on the CWM responses, four breakout session topics were chosen (readmissions & balancing LOS, safety, infection prevention, sepsis outcomes), and participants were asked to think about and discuss “What is YOUR organization working on at a system level that you would want to be measured on and/or receive credit for improving?”. Based on their poll responses, participants were sent into breakout groups to discuss their topic more in depth (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Breakout Session Survey Questions

photo with two breakout session survey questions

Readmissions & Balancing LOS

Members expressed great interest in identifying opportunities to incentivize process measures. Currently tracked metrics that were shared included order set utilization, care coordination, evaluating daily readmission risk reports, and transitions to home care. It was noted however, that these metrics may be difficult to track via claims data. Another system-wide metric discussed was the percentage of patients being seen by their primary care physician one week post discharge. The measure of success could be either achievement (outperform MVC All) or improvement (improve on system metric compared to previous measure).

Some barriers to implementing these processes as a system would be system-wide financial support for care coordination and nurse navigators. These positions are typically site specific and funded through the site’s individual budget.

Safety

During this breakout session members discussed some of the interests their sites/systems had around tracking safety metrics across the system. Sometimes a system can be different than just multiple hospitals under the same umbrella. Oaklawn Hospital, for example, is a single hospital site, but their goal is to align better with their primary care offices which requires a systems approach.

When looking at safety measures, Henry Ford Health shared ideas on how measuring or tracking a patient’s nutritional status might be valuable, as well as physical or occupational therapy consults for falls. Patients with a hip fracture from a fall tend to have longer hospital stays, this could be tracked by LOS codes such as weakness or loss of balance.

Infection Prevention

Members discussed some of the successful methods they have been implementing so far with their infection prevention initiatives. ProMedica Charles & Virginia Hickman shared they use a hub and spoke model where the sites have a system level clinical risk department that helps oversee essential hospital acquired infection data (using PowerBI, a data visualization program). This program enables a drill down for the different hospital leaders to design and implement quality improvement initiatives at their site.

At the system level leaders review data to identify opportunities and coordinate with hospital quality leads to implement improvement strategies, maintaining an upstream and downstream approach. In the UP Health system, they use a collaborative model involving regular reporting and discussion of quality markers among hospitals under the LifePoint organization, with resource sharing and active discussion facilitated by calls that include Duke University Health System partners.

Sepsis Outcomes

Members shared that their health systems have hospital level sepsis committees that meet once per month to review sepsis cases, as well as system level sepsis committees that include a representative from each site that meet monthly or quarterly to review sepsis cases. One of the ways that members are tracking their sepsis cases across the system is by tracking when sepsis patients go from “door to initial antibiotic received,” since research has shown this to be the biggest impact on reducing sepsis related mortality.

Sepsis compliance is also an important metric that systems are tracking to meet CMS standards. Sites within a system track sepsis compliance metrics and review them monthly both site by site and system wide. Through the group discussion, the idea of tracking the associated order sets for sepsis cases through MVC claims data may be interesting to view at a system level (though singling out order sets in claims data may be difficult).

Wrap Up

The breakout sessions not only helped to highlight what health systems are currently doing to track quality across their sites but also gave some insight into what metrics could be utilized as performance-based incentives in the future.

MVC welcomes workgroup presenters from across Michigan to share their expertise, success stories, initiatives, and solution-focused ideas with MVC members. Please reach out to us by email if you are interested in being a workgroup presenter or submit a presentation proposal here.

0
View Post
MVC Refreshes Registry Reports with New Data & Methods

MVC Refreshes Registry Reports with New Data & Methods

At the end of February, MVC updated its registry with new payer data. MVC adds new data to the registry monthly upon receipt of new claims from included payers. This most recent update included the addition of two new months of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) and Blue Care Network (BCN) claims, one new quarter of Medicaid claims, and one new quarter of Medicare claims. Following these updates, the MVC registry now has the following data ranges for its data:

  • BCBSM PPO (Commercial and Medicare Advantage): 01/01/2015 – 12/31/2024 (index events through 09/30/2024)
  • BCN (Commercial and Medicare Advantage): 01/01/2015 – 12/31/2024 (index events through 09/30/2024)
  • Medicaid: 01/01/2015 – 12/31/2024 (index events through 09/30/2024)
  • Medicare FFS: 01/01/2015 – 06/30/2024 (index events through 03/31/2024)

Anytime MVC publishes new data on its registry, the newest claims for each payer are incorporated throughout the various reports and dashboards where that payer’s data is present, including the interactive multi-payer reports for cardiac rehabilitation utilization and preoperative testing.

Refreshed Multi-Payer Cardiac Rehabilitation Reports

The multi-payer cardiac rehabilitation utilization reports were added to the registry in the first half of 2024 and have replaced the static PDF hospital-level push reports MVC previously distributed biannually. The regular release of new data on the registry, therefore, gives members opportunities throughout the year to check progress on cardiac rehabilitation metrics more regularly and find opportunities for improvement. For example, current data on cardiac rehabilitation enrollment for CABG patients with episode start dates between Jan. 1, 2024, and Sept. 30, 2024, indicates wide variability among hospitals, with many sites observing rates below the recommended 70%. Across the collaborative, enrollment in cardiac rehab after CABG procedures was as low as 28% at one MVC member hospital and as high as 83% at another with a statewide average of 61% (Figure 1). Similarly, cardiac rehab utilization is much lower on average among PCI patients over the same time period (32%), and there is wide inter-hospital variation with rates ranging between 6% and 86% (Figure 2).

Figure 1. Statewide Rankings for Cardiac Rehab Utilization within 90 Days After Discharge from CABG, 1/1/2024-9/30/2024

dot graph of Statewide Rankings for Cardiac Rehab Utilization within 90 Days After Discharge from CABG, 1/1/2024-9/30/2024

Figure 2. Statewide Rankings for Cardiac Rehab Utilization within 90 Days After Discharge from PCI, 1/1/2024-9/30/2024

dot graph of Statewide Rankings for Cardiac Rehab Utilization within 90 Days After Discharge from PCI, 1/1/2024-9/30/2024

This latest registry update also included a methodological change impacting cardiac rehabilitation reporting for attendance. These methodological improvements were meant to increase the accuracy of MVC’s reported mean number of visits attended within a selected time period. MVC noted that this change resulted in increases in the average number of completed cardiac rehabilitation visits overall, and especially among BCN and Medicaid beneficiaries. This increase in the average number of visits reflects the fact that MVC improved the capture of multiple cardiac rehabilitation visits over a longer time period billed on a single claim.

Refreshed Multi-Payer Preoperative Testing Reports

The multi-payer preoperative testing utilization reports were added to the registry at the end of 2024 and have also replaced static hospital-level push reports that were previously distributed as biannual PDF reports to members. Looking at all available 2024 claims across payers, there is evidence of a small decrease in the MVC All rate of preoperative testing prior to low-risk surgery beginning in late 2022 and continuing throughout 2023 and into 2024 (Figure 3). Those members who are working to reduce unnecessary preoperative testing are encouraged to check their updated data. MVC is also able to supplement registry data with custom analytics by an MVC analyst to meet the needs of members. One such site recently utilized MVC’s custom analytics to identify differences in preoperative testing rates by physician NPI to support conversations about intra-hospital variation by provider and service line.

Figure 3. Statewide Rate of Preoperative Testing and Relative Difference in Preoperative Testing by Quarter, 2020-2024

line graph of Statewide Rate of Preoperative Testing and Relative Difference in Preoperative Testing by Quarter, 2020-2024

MVC’s registry contains an extensive collection of multi-payer, P4P, and payer-specific views and metrics. If you are newer to the registry or would like a refresher on how best to leverage the information, reach out to the MVC Coordinating Center for information about a custom registry review.

0
View Post
February Workgroups Highlight Hybrid Cardiac Rehab Delivery and Patient Journey Mapping

February Workgroups Highlight Hybrid Cardiac Rehab Delivery and Patient Journey Mapping

In February, MVC hosted two virtual workgroup presentations – the first focused on hybrid cardiac rehab program delivery and the second a health in action session focused on patient journey mapping. The MVC Coordinating Center hosts workgroup presentations twice per month with topics rotating between post-discharge follow-up, sepsis, cardiac rehabilitation, rural health, preoperative testing, and heath in action (ad hoc focused topics). Each month, the MVC Coordinating Center publishes key highlights from the past month’s presentations to support practice sharing across the state.

Cardiac Rehab Workgroup February 11, 2025

MVC’s first cardiac rehab workgroup of 2025 featured a presentation by Dr. Steven Keteyian, PhD, Director of Cardiac Rehabilitation/Preventive Cardiology at Henry Ford Health System. The presentation focused on the development and implementation of a non-traditional hybrid model of care delivery.

During the COVID-19 pandemic many healthcare facilities had to transition to virtual platforms to continue providing essential medical care to patients. Henry Ford Health’s cardiac rehabilitation programs, like many other services, pivoted to meet the needs of patients by establishing an evidence-based hybrid delivery model.

Dr. Keteyian emphasized that cardiac rehabilitation is more than just physical exercise. It is a comprehensive health improvement plan containing several core components (Figure 1) such as nutritional counseling, psychosocial management, weight management and body composition, tobacco cessation counseling, and more. All of these components are combined to establish an individualized treatment plan for the patient.

Figure 1. AACVPR/AHA Cardiac Rehab Performance Measures

seven AACVPR/AHA Cardiac Rehab Performance Measures

Dr. Keteyian explained that their patients begin their program in-person to establish baseline assessments and a treatment plan. Once established, cardiac rehab patients have the option to participate virtually for remaining sessions or return on-site depending on their preferences and the need to assess them in-person. Dr. Keteyian noted several factors that drive the use of hybrid cardiac rehab such as patient needs (returning to work, family care responsibilities, travel distance/transportation limitations), limited resources within the health system for a fully on-site program, and limited patient availability during the on-site hours of operation.

To be eligible for participation in cardiac rehabilitation, patients need to have a qualifying event such as acute coronary syndrome (ACS), heart valve repair/replacement (TAVR), cardiac transplant, or stable heart failure (with less than 35% ejection fraction). Henry Ford uses MVC data to track the percent of eligible patients enrolled in cardiac rehab within 90 days, and compares rates across different qualifying events (e.g., AMI, CHF, TAVR, etc.) to see where cardiac rehab is being underutilized compared to averages for the state and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The Henry Ford team began incorporating virtual cardiac rehab delivery as a strategy to increase enrollment and attendance among eligible patients.

Dr. Keteyian also discussed some common questions and concerns he hears when discussing hybrid program delivery, such as needed equipment, patient safety, and program efficacy. He shared information from the iAttend randomized control trial that Henry Ford Health participated in from 2019 – 2024, which tracked cardiac patient demographic data, eligibility, participation, and outcomes for hybrid and facility-based cardiac rehab programming (Keteyian, 2024). Data showed that none of the hybrid participants were required to go on-site due to clinical concerns, no virtual visits required physician intervention, and there were no mechanical falls requiring medical attention indicated in either group. A second randomized trial, HF-ACTION, tracked 2,331 heart failure (HFrEF) patients and found that hospitalizations during or within 3 hours after exercise occurred for 2% of the hybrid participants versus 3% for on-site patients. The mortality rate for patients in both study groups was very low (approximately 0.4%) indicating safety was not an issue. Though the data did show hybrid patients not progressing as quickly through the program as on-site patients, this lag became a teaching moment for cardiac rehab staff and an opportunity for improvement.

Attendance for both programs was comparable, and patient outcomes were statistically similar with patients showing improvement in desired performance measures such as peak oxygen uptake, exercise duration, and walking distance (Keteyian, 2024). Staff burden as a result of running a hybrid program was a key concern. To mitigate the potential for burnout, Henry Ford Health aligned services and materials with how the on-site cardiac rehab program is managed.

Dr. Keteyian closed by pointing out that the number of patients who qualify for cardiac rehabilitation each year outnumbers the available spaces in on-site programs throughout the United States. Even if these programs were running at full capacity, only ~ 50% of the eligible patients could be seen. He argued, therefore, that there is a significant need to increase the number of best-practice cardiac rehabilitation programs and the methods available to patients to access them (Balady, 2011).

MVC Cardiac Rehab Workgroup Feb. 11, 2025

Health in Action Workgroup February 27, 2025

MVC’s health in action workgroup this month included a presentation and workshop on patient journey mapping with MVC’s Associate Program Manager Jana Stewart, MS, MPH. This workshop was a continuation from the October 2024 collaborative-wide meeting’s post-discharge follow-up breakout session. Following the fall workshop, MVC collated member feedback on common barriers to follow-up for heart failure patients, which Stewart summarized as part of the February workgroup presentation. Participants of the workgroup also engaged in polls and two guided breakout discussions aimed at improving outcomes for patients with congestive heart failure.

Using Patient Journey Mapping to Improve Patient Outcomes

Stewart explained that the purpose of patient journey mapping is to understand the patient’s experience and pain points as they manage their health. This practice looks at service delivery by providers as well as the patients’ steps beyond healthcare appointments, providing useful data for root cause analyses and developing effective interventions. Stewart shared examples of patient journey maps that described what a patient might do, think, and feel as they seek healthcare services as well as maps illustrating a hospital’s workflow for enrolling eligible cardiac rehab patients. By generating maps from both the patient and provider perspective, one can identify opportunities for efficiencies and necessary interventions points.

Figure 2. Sample Patient Journey Map for Enrollment in Cardiac Rehab Following a Heart Procedure

Sample Patient Journey Map for Enrollment in Cardiac Rehab Following a Heart Procedure

In the first of two breakout sessions, attendees provided feedback and edits on a patient journey map for cardiac rehab enrollment following heart surgery. Attendees reimagined how the patient experience and hospital steps might change for a heart failure patient. Some interventions that were discussed included staff reviewing discharge lists frequently to keep track of patients, having a nurse navigator to help patients prepare for cardiac rehab, and keeping a consistent treatment plan between inpatient and outpatient providers.

Patient ExperienceKey Barriers That Impact Patients

Stewart also outlined some key considerations regarding a patient’s experience and some of the barriers that may impact their ability to manage their health. One key barrier discussed was the limitations of our brain's processing capacity and the ways in which mental fatigue make it harder to remember and cope with information. Famed environmental psychologist George Miller once posited that a typical person is able to process and store to memory 5 – 9 pieces of information at a time. When a person is mentally fatigued (e.g., sleep deprived, burned out, cognitively burdened), their ability to understand and store information decreases.

Stewart cited a research study on patient recall after specialty care visits (Laws et al, 2018), which found only half of patients remembered the recommendations they received from a provider, and only about half of what they remembered was recalled correctly. This can have a significant impact on how well a patient follows their treatment plan after they are discharged or sent home. These recall difficulties are further exacerbated in patients with more extensive mental fatigue, such as those experiencing minority stress, unmet social needs, older age, lower health literacy, and other factors. Stewart argued that a patient’s current mental capacity and literacy are key considerations when journey mapping, as they are often the culprit for not following treatment plans.

One strategy Stewart shared that can reduce cognitive burden is the use of storytelling. Used as a framework for delivering information, stories allow patients to better understand and remember details. This can be done through patient story videos as well as case studies that demonstrate the progression of an illness or treatment plan. During one of the breakout discussions, participants brainstormed how they might use storytelling to communicate information to CHF patients. Ideas included establishing private community groups on social media for patients to share their stories, patient story pamphlets, and videos to play on hospital televisions or linked in patient discharge materials.

The feedback and ideas generated by participants during February's health in action workgroup will be used to draft resources for MVC member sites. MVC plans to bring those draft materials to future meetings or workgroups to gather feedback prior to dissemination. Participants also received a copy of the patient journey mapping template so they can utilize this approach at their site(s).

MVC Health in Action Workgroup Feb. 27, 2025

If you are interested in pursuing a healthcare improvement initiative, MVC has a robust registry of claims data that can be utilized as well as site specialists who can help facilitate connections with peers doing similar work. Please reach out to us here if you would like to learn more about MVC data or engagement offerings.

0
View Post
November Workgroups Highlight Preop Testing Project and Cardiac Rehab Access Initiative

November Workgroups Highlight Preop Testing Project and Cardiac Rehab Access Initiative

In November, MVC hosted two virtual workgroup presentations – the first on preoperative testing was led by a fellow Collaborative Quality Initiative (CQI), and the second on cardiac rehabilitation was delivered by an MVC member hospital. MVC hosts two virtual workgroups per month with topics rotating between post-discharge follow-up, sepsis, cardiac rehabilitation, rural health, preoperative testing, and health in action (ad hoc focused topics). Each month, the MVC Coordinating Center publishes key highlights from these presentations to support resource and best practice sharing across the state.

November Preoperative Testing Workgroup: Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC)

The first workgroup of November focused on preoperative testing and featured a presentation by Pamela Racchi, Clinical Site Coordinator with the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC), and Susanna Fortney, Clinical Quality Specialist at ProMedica Charles and Virginia Hickman Hospital. To start, Racchi’s presentation provided an update on MSQC’s Preoperative Testing for Low-Risk Surgeries Project, including updated findings for 2024 and plans for 2025. Fortney then presented on ProMedica Charles and Virginia Hickman’s progress with reducing preoperative testing through the lens of participating in both the MSQC preop testing project and the RITE-Size pilot.

MSQC’s preoperative testing project is a continuation of a pilot started in 2022. The goals of the project include:

  1. To define the extent of routine preoperative testing in low-risk surgeries,
  2. To identify underlying reasons for overuse of preoperative testing in low-risk surgeries, and
  3. To implement interventions to heighten awareness and reduce variation among hospitals

Their project varies slightly from MVC’s preoperative testing offerings in that MSQC includes a slightly broader range of low-risk surgeries. The MSQC preop testing project includes abstraction for cases of minor hernia (abdominal hernias <3 cm and all inguinal/ femoral hernia repairs), laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and breast lumpectomy.

During the pilot, MSQC included all ASA classes in their analysis. Based on feedback from site participants, however, MSQC has since limited their evaluated cases to only ASA class I and II, elective cases, and low-risk surgeries identified as the intended primary procedure (based on CPT codes) for 2024. Patients falling into ASA classes I and II are expected to be stable with their comorbid conditions and therefore require less frequent testing.

Overall, results since September 2024 suggest ASA I and II cases are all trending in the right direction; abstracted data currently indicates preop testing rates of 18% among ASA I cases (with a goal of 25% or less) and 31% among ASA II cases (with a goal of 32% or less), as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Racchi also noted that the success of reducing preoperative testing is dependent on there being no further increases in unnecessary testing on the day of surgery. Historically, MSQC has calculated preoperative testing rates like MVC, up to 30 days prior to a surgery but not including the day of surgery. However, MSQC’s abstractors can additionally identify testing completed on the day of surgery. In 2024, MSQC abstractors are assessing cases that received testing on the day of surgery as well as those that received testing in the 30 days prior to a surgery. Preliminary performance results suggested there was an increase in day of preoperative testing when compared to baseline for both ASA I and II cases. Racchi noted that these analyses help determine whether testing was clinically necessary versus a result of physician habit.

Racchi and Fortney both spoke to the benefits of increasing engagement between surgery and anesthesiology to streamline preoperative testing protocols and processes. Between 2022 and 2023, ProMedica Charles and Virginia Hickman was able to reduce their preoperative testing rate by nearly 20% with just a few modifications to their testing protocol and additional onboarding of the anesthesiology providers.

A recent review of preoperative testing cases at ProMedica Hickman that were labeled unnecessary revealed nearly 40% were, in fact, medically justified and another 42% were due to protocol misinterpretation. Interestingly, the greatest rate of unnecessary preoperative testing was found to derive from ProMedica Hickman’s preadmission testing department. Fortney noted they had success embedding an adapted version of the RITE-Size program’s decision aid (Figure 2) within their anesthesiology preoperative protocols, and this helped to provide a more robust visual for their providers to reference when completing preop documentation.

Figure 2.

ProMedica Hickman additionally implemented a process for one-on-one training with preadmission testing (PAT) nursing staff, re-education, and the inclusion of case studies. The PAT nurses have also been included in MSQC/RITE-Size project update meetings and are given access to push reports so they can better understand their progress and impact.

The RITE-Size project is a collaboration between several CQI organizations – the Michigan Program on Value Enhancement (MPrOVE), the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC), MSQC, and the Anesthesiology Performance Improvement and Reporting Exchange (ASPIRE). Each organization has individual projects underway to address unnecessary preoperative testing, but also collaborate under the umbrella of RITE-Size to support de-implementation with additional customized support and coaching. Learn more about RITE-Size by visiting the program website here.

November 5 Preoperative Testing Workgroup

November Cardiac Rehab Workgroup: Marshfield Medical Center – Dickinson

The second November workgroup focused on cardiac rehabilitation – another of MVC’s value-based initiatives. This workgroup featured a joint presentation by Carolyn Hoy, BSN, Director of Quality; Courtney Swanson, BSN, RN, Heart Care Clinic and Cardiopulmonary Rehab Manager; and Lacey Schjoth, BS, Cardiac Rehab Coordinator at Marshfield Medical Center – Dickinson. Hoy, Swanson, and Schjoth’s presentation introduced Marshfield – Dickinson’s cardiac rehab Patient Access Improvement Project, an initiative rooted in one of their core values of patient-centered care.

Although part of a much larger system, Marshfield Medical Center – Dickinson is a relatively small hospital with about 49 general med/surgical beds. To support a significantly rural population in the Upper Peninsula, the Marshfield – Dickinson team identified the need to modify their cardiac rehab program to improve access. Their three main goals included:

  • Increase the volume of patients seen,
  • Accurately track referrals,
  • Expand services to include a supervised exercise therapy (SET) peripheral artery disease (PAD) program

Swanson and Schjoth described how the Northern Michigan landscape and weather contributed to some of the barriers patients faced in accessing cardiac rehab care. Outside of Marshfield – Dickinson’s cardiac rehab center, the next rehabilitation facility is nearly 45 miles away. To support patients driving a long distance to receive cardiac rehab, the team worked to coordinate with their patient’s other appointments. They also flexed their schedules to accommodate earlier or later availability and were willing to shift the appointment times as needed pending weather conditions.

Ultimately, the team was able to increase their class size to five patients per class and increased their class offerings by one cardiac rehab (and one pulmonary rehab) class per day by December 2023. They saw a nearly 27% increase in patient enrollment between 2022 and 2023 (Figure 3). Thus far in 2024, their patient volumes are on track to match or exceed 2023.

Figure 3.

Since Marshfield – Dickinson is unable to support a Phase 1 cardiac rehab program, most of their referrals come from outside facilities located in Wisconsin. Connecting with patients quickly after referrals are received is helpful to reduce the duration of time between referral and enrollment. With adjustments to their workflow, the team was able to reduce the average time from referral to initial contact to an average of just 3.5 days as of November 2024. The team also observed a corresponding reduction in the time to first cardiac rehab visit of just 16.5 days on average.

However, rectifying referral documentation from multiple outside sources can slow down this process. Additionally, surveyed patients reported that one of the largest barriers to starting cardiac rehab was a lack of insurance coverage or high copays, with nearly 9% of patients identifying this as the primary reason they did not schedule their initial cardiac rehab appointment in 2024.  The team has recently brought on a financial counselor to assist in contacting insurance companies and ensuring adequate and accurate referrals documentation.

Lastly, the Marshfield – Dickinson cardiac rehab team worked to develop close partnerships with local cardiology providers. Ensuring local cardiology providers are aware of and supportive of cardiac rehab is a critical step that generates additional opportunities for program endorsement and patient education by the provider. Marshfield – Dickinson has additionally added Dr. Massabni, an interventional cardiologist specializing in peripheral artery disease, to their staff. This allowed them to further develop their SET PAD program in January 2024 and they are seeing increasing enrollment in this specialized vascular program.

Much of MVC’s work with its members and partners in the space of cardiac rehab is delivered under the umbrella of the Michigan Cardiac Rehab network (MiCR), a collaborative partnership with the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2). You can see the MiCR website and offerings here. MVC also offers a robust registry of medical insurance claims data and data specialists that can help navigate and create custom analytic reports on cardiac rehab utilization metrics. Please reach out to the Coordinating Center by email if you would like to learn more about MVC data or engagement offerings.

November 21 Cardiac Rehab Workgroup

To learn more about the efforts showcased by November’s workgroup presenters, or other past workgroup presentations, please visit MVC’s YouTube Channel here.

December’s workgroups will feature a post-discharge follow-up presentation on December 3 led by Crystal Young of Corewell Health Trenton and Natalie Holland of MDHHS. Additionally, on December 12, Toni Moriarty-Smith of McLaren Northern Michigan will present a rural health presentation. The complete 2024 and 2025 MVC event calendars and workgroup registration links are available here.

0
View Post
MVC, BMC2, HBOM Announce New Cardiac Rehab Materials & Opportunities at MiCR Meeting

MVC, BMC2, HBOM Announce New Cardiac Rehab Materials & Opportunities at MiCR Meeting

In partnership with BMC2 and HBOM, the Michigan Value Collaborative recently co-hosted the Michigan Cardiac Rehab network (MiCR) virtual summer meeting, which brought together providers, quality improvement staff, rehab staff, and patients with a shared interest in improving participation in cardiac rehabilitation. Over 70 attendees from across the state joined the meeting on Aug. 9, where they heard updates from the MiCR leadership, previewed new MiCR resources, and heard from a panel of hospital representatives who discussed their experience using the MiCR NewBeat materials.

NewBeat Success and Re-Orders

One key announcement from the meeting included the launch of a second round for placing NewBeat material print orders [ORDER FORM LINK]. The MiCR team will accept submitted order forms through Tues., Sept. 24. Those who request the free printed materials can either pick them up at the fall in-person MiCR meeting in Midland or have them mailed to an address they designate. Early survey evidence suggests that implementation of the NewBeat program is associated with an increase in confidence across a number of metrics (Figure 1).

Figure 1. NewBeat Survey Results Pre- and Post-Implementation

Speaking to the value of these materials was a panel of representatives from Corewell Health South, Holland Hospital, and Michigan Medicine—three sites who ordered NewBeat materials in the first round at the start of 2024. Each shared their experience using the materials and advice on their integration. HBOM also recorded virtual interviews with the Corewell Health and Holland Hospital site contacts for use in a NewBeat success story video (Figure 2), which was played for the meeting’s attendees.

Figure 2. Implementing NewBeat Feedback Video

Those who wish to place an order for NewBeat materials in the current round will again have the opportunity to request the MiCR patient/provider educational handout (available in English, Spanish, and Arabic), the cardiac rehab liaison postcard, and the cardiac care cards. Some customizations are possible to the handout and postcard design to include local hospital or rehab center contact information. Additionally, there is a new offering included in this round of ordering that was launched at the meeting: a new discharge packet sticker. These new sticker designs (Figures 3 and 4) can be affixed to the outside of a patient’s discharge folder and are meant to stand out to patients and families who are often inundated with discharge paperwork. They alert the patient that their discharge paperwork includes a referral to cardiac rehab as the next step in their care.

Figure 3. NewBeat Sticker Journey Design

Figure 4. NewBeat Sticker Golden Ticket Design

MiCR Mini Grant RFP Opens for Second Round

The summer meeting also included an announcement that MiCR’s mini grant program to fund small, local cardiac rehab quality improvement projects will similarly be re-opened for a second round of submissions. The first round resulted in the funding of projects at MyMichigan Midland, DMC Huron Valley Sinai, and Ascension Rochester. MiCR is accepting new submissions through Fri., Sept. 13 for up to $5,000 per project. Full details on the RFP and application are available on the MiCR website.

MiCR Updates & Meeting Materials

Finally, the MiCR leadership team announced the development of a neutrally-branded, customizable patient education video that can be shared with hospitals or rehab programs to play on their own websites or waiting room monitors. The video was developed in response to feedback from partner sites that online materials need to be improved and that neutral video content about the value of cardiac rehab is limited. MiCR developed a video for use by network partners and also identified several existing videos published by MillionHearts, Mayo Clinic, and others.

The MVC and BMC2 teams are looking forward to the Michigan Cardiac Rehab Network's fall in-person meeting on Fri., Nov. 8, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., at the H Hotel in Midland. MyMichigan is serving as co-host for the event in collaboration with MiCR. Additional event details will be shared in the coming weeks. Those who were unable to attend the summer meeting can view the meeting recording [LINK] or meeting slides [LINK]. Please reach out to info@michigancr.org with any questions.

0
View Post
MVC Introduces New Multi-Payer Cardiac Rehab Registry Reports

MVC Introduces New Multi-Payer Cardiac Rehab Registry Reports

The MVC Coordinating Center added four new multi-payer reports to its online registry in April. These new reports evaluate cardiac rehabilitation utilization and encompass all metrics previously provided annually in MVC’s hospital-level cardiac rehab push report for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), heart valve repair or replacement (SAVR or TAVR), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and congestive heart failure (CHF). Each report reflects the most up-to-date available claims data from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) PPO Commercial, BCBSM PPO Medicare Advantage (MA), Blue Care Network (BCN) HMO Commercial, BCN MA, Medicare Fee-for-Service, and Medicaid insurance plans. Users may select any combination of cardiac conditions and insurance plans to assess in each report.

In addition to allowing dynamic selection of cardiac conditions and payers, the reports allow for customization of report date range (the span of episode start dates), episode length (the time period following each index event), and index place of service (e.g., inpatient, outpatient, emergency department). Users may also filter by patient characteristics including gender, age, and comorbidities (diagnoses prior to the index event). Other patient-level characteristics related to the reflected episode can also be filtered, including whether the patient was transferred during their index event, was diagnosed with COVID-19 during the index event or within 30 days post-discharge, and by certain diagnoses during the index event or within 90 days. Up to four comparison groups are offered for each figure: the collaborative-wide measure, MVC All; the measure among other hospitals in the region, Hospital Region; the measure among only hospitals of the same type, Acute Care/Critical Access Cohort; and the measure among other rural hospitals (if applicable), MHA Rural Hospital Cohort.

Cardiac Rehab Utilization Rates

The first of the four new report provides data on cardiac rehab utilization rates (Figure 1). This report includes a description of cardiac rehab benefits followed by two figures reflecting utilization rates among episodes of the desired condition and payer combinations after all selected filters have been applied. The first figure shows the overall rate of cardiac rehab compared to utilization goals set by the Michigan Cardiac Rehab network (MiCR) and Million Hearts®. The second figure shows utilization trends over time at the user’s hospital(s) and a selected comparison group. This full report and all other reports can be downloaded as a ready-to-print PDF or image file.

Figure 1. Cardiac Rehab Utilization Rates Report

Cardiac Rehab Utilization Rankings

The next report provides data on cardiac rehab utilization rankings, showcasing the ranked order of hospital-level utilization rates for a selected comparison group. For example, in Figure 2 there are data points for cardiac rehab utilization rates during AMI, CABG, PCI, SAVR, and TAVR episodes originating at MVC Hospitals A, B, and C between December 1, 2018, and November 30, 2023 compared to all other MVC general acute care hospitals. The average rate across all comparison hospitals is about 31%, and each point outlined in orange represents the rate at an individual comparison hospital. Again, this report and all others may be downloaded in a ready-to-share format.

Figure 2. Cardiac Rehab Utilization Rankings Report

The remaining new cardiac rehab registry reports provide visual hospital rankings in the same format as the utilization rankings report, but for two other measures: 1) mean days to first cardiac rehab visit, which ranks the average number of days from index discharge to patients’ first cardiac rehab visit (up to 365 days); and 2), mean number of cardiac rehab visits, which ranks the average number of cardiac rehab visits completed within a selected episode length. These reports offer the same dynamic filters and output capabilities.

All MVC registry users will have access to these reports to view the data for their site(s). If you do not have registry access and are interested in using the registry to view these data, you should complete MVC’s user access request form. If you have any questions or feedback about the new registry reports, please contact the Coordinating Center.