Continuity of Care by Primary Care Provider in Young Children with Chronic Conditions ===================================================================================== * Yair Bannett * Rebecca M. Gardner * Lynne C. Huffman * Heidi M. Feldman * Lee M. Sanders ## Abstract **Objectives** (1) To assess continuity of care by primary-care provider (CoC), an established quality indicator, in children with asthma, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and no chronic conditions, and (2) to determine patient factors that influenced CoC. **Methods** Retrospective cohort study of electronic health records from all office visits of children under 9 years, seen ≥4 times between 2015 and 2019 in 10 practices of a community-based primary healthcare network in California. Three cohorts were constructed: (1)Asthma: ≥2 visits with asthma visit diagnoses; (2)ASD: same method; (3)Controls: no chronic conditions. CoC, using the Usual Provider of Care measure (range >0-1), was calculated for (1)total visits and (2)well-care visits only. Fractional regression models examined CoC adjusting for patient age, medical insurance, practice affiliation, and number of visits. **Results** Of 30,678 eligible children, 1875 (6.1%) were classified as Asthma, 294 (1.0%) as ASD, and 15,465 (50.4%) as Controls. Asthma and ASD had lower total CoC than Controls (Mean=0.58, SD 0.21, M=0.57, SD 0.20, M=0.66, SD 0.21). Differences among well-care CoC were smaller (Asthma M=0.80, ASD M=0.78, Controls M=0.82). In regression models, lower total CoC was found for Asthma (aOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.94). Lower total and well-care CoC were associated with public insurance (aOR 0.77, CI 0.74-0.81; aOR 0.64, CI 0.59-0.69). **Conclusion** Children with asthma in this primary-care network had lower CoC compared to children without chronic conditions. Public insurance was the most prominent patient factor associated with low CoC. Quality initiatives should address disparities in CoC for children with chronic conditions. **Table of Contents Summary** Continuity of care by primary care provider is an established quality indicator. We compared continuity in young children with asthma, autism, and no chronic conditions. **What’s Known on This Subject** Continuity of care has emerged as an important component of care in the patient-centered medical home, especially for children with chronic medical conditions. However, it has been minimally studied across chronic conditions, especially in neurodevelopmental disorders. **What This Study Adds** Children with asthma, but not those with autism spectrum disorder, had lower continuity of care compared to children without chronic conditions. Public insurance was associated with lower care continuity for children with and without chronic conditions, highlighting important sociodemographic disparities. **Contributors’ Statement Page** Dr. Bannett conceptualized and designed the study, defined and coordinated data extraction, carried out the data analyses, drafted the manuscript, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. Ms. Gardner participated in study design, extensively reformatted the data for analysis, performed statistical data analysis, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. Dr. Feldman participated in study design, supervised data analysis and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. Drs. Huffman and Sanders supervised the conceptualization and design of the study, supervised data analysis, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and are responsible for all aspects of the work. ## Introduction Continuity of care by primary care provider (CoC) is widely considered a core component of the patient-centered medical home. CoC is an established quality indicator that has been linked – especially in children with chronic conditions – to improved care coordination, healthcare utilization, and receipt of preventive care.1-6 However, in current primary care practice, children may not be seen by the same primary care provider (PCP) in their first years of life, potentially contributing to over- and under treatment, compromising patient safety, and ultimately adversely affecting health outcomes. To date, the extent of CoC has not been compared across different pediatric chronic conditions and has rarely been evaluated in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. Autism spectrum disorder and asthma are common chronic conditions of childhood, requiring continuous care management by a skilled primary care provider. Asthma affects 8-9% of US children,7 and ambulatory asthma care is mainly provided in primary care settings.8 High continuity of ambulatory asthma care in children has been shown to be associated with decreased asthma-specific emergency department utilization and number of hospitalizations.1,9-11 Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a chronic neurodevelopmental condition estimated to affect approximately 2% of US children.12,13 The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published guidelines in 2001 and 2006 stating that the primary care medical home is the ideal setting for developmental screening and identification of early signs of ASD.14-16 CoC might be especially important in young children with ASD, given its potential influence on timely diagnosis and treatment of ASD, which have been shown to improve patient outcomes.17,18 However, CoC has not been studied in young children with ASD. Comparing CoC in children with physical and neurodevelopmental chronic conditions, and identifying factors associated with low CoC, may inform targeted quality improvement interventions aimed at improving high-quality care of children with chronic conditions. In this study, we examined electronic health record (EHR) data from a large community-based pediatrics primary care network (1) to compare CoC in young children with asthma and ASD to children with no chronic condition, and (2) to determine patient factors that influence continuity of care. We hypothesized that CoC would be low in children with asthma and ASD compared to those without chronic conditions and that differences in CoC between children with asthma and ASD would be accounted for by number of primary care visits. ## Methods ### Setting Packard Children’s Health Alliance (PCHA) is a community-based pediatric healthcare network in the San Francisco Bay Area, affiliated with Stanford Children’s Health and Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital. PCHA has 24 pediatrics primary care offices, grouped into 10 practices. ### Data Sources and Population We conducted a retrospective review of EHRs for a cohort of all pediatric patients under the age of 9 years seen by PCHA PCPs from October 1, 2015 (date coinciding with adoption of ICD-10 codes) to December 31, 2019. We extracted de-identified structured data from all office encounters. To create a robust and meaningful measure of CoC, we included only children who had at least 4 visits during the examined period and who were seen over a minimum of one year. Figure 1 shows the study cohort flowchart. ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/02/08/2021.02.04.21251018/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/08/2021.02.04.21251018/F1) Figure 1. Study Flow Diagram This study was determined by the Stanford University School of Medicine institutional review board to not represent human subject research. ### Measures ### Study outcomes: Continuity of Care by Primary Care Provider We calculated continuity of care (CoC) using the Usual Provider of Care (UPC) measure (range: >0 - 1), an easily interpretable measure that is commonly used in EHR-based studies that examine CoC.19 This measure is calculated as a ratio: for each patient, the number of primary care visits conducted by the most commonly seen provider is divided by the total number of primary care visits. As done in previous studies, we calculated two CoC outcomes per patient: (1) total, based on all visits and (2) well-care, based on well-child visits only.5 We defined well-care visits as visits with a code or descriptor representing a well-care visit in at least one of the following structured EHR fields: Visit diagnosis code; Current Precedural Terminology (CPT) code; Visit type descriptor (see Supplementary 1). We also used the Visit type structured field to define same day sick visits as visits that had the descriptor “same day sick”. ### Primary independent variable: Study Cohorts We constructed the following 3 cohorts: (1) Asthma – included patients who had at least two visits in the study period with a visit diagnosis code of asthma (and no ASD diagnoses); (2) ASD - included patients who had at least two visits in the study period with a visit diagnosis code of Autism Spectrum Disorder; (3) Controls – patients who did not have any chronic condition diagnosed during the study period, based on a list of pediatric chronic conditions.20 (see Supplementary 1). ### Secondary Independent Variables Health care utilization factors: acknowledging that the vast majority of patients in this network (97%) received their care during the study period solely in one primary care practice, we compared CoC across the 10 practices and included the primary care practice affiliation as an independent variable in regression models. The number of visits per patient during the study period, which has a direct impact on the ability to maintain CoC, was another important independent variable we included in regression models. We used patient structured data in the EHR to describe the following patient characteristics: patient age (mean age in years during study period), sex, race (White/Asian/African American/Other), ethnicity (Hispanic/Non-Hispanic), and medical insurance at first study period visit (private/public/military). ### Statistical Analysis We used descriptive statistics and standardized mean differences (SMD) to summarize and compare patient characteristics across the three cohorts.21 SMD values of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 correspond to small, moderate, and large differences, respectively. To examine associations among cohort affiliation, patient characteristics, and study outcomes, we implemented fractional logistic regression models and calculated 95% confidence intervals for the adjusted odds ratios (aOR). Patient race and ethnicity data were not included in regression models due to high percent of missing data (32% for race and 35% for ethnicity). Imputation was not attempted, since race/ethnicity data were highly correlated with insurance type (see Supplementary 2); therefore, the addition of an imputed race/ethnicity variable would likely not yield additional information beyond what was provided by insurance type. Patient sex was also not included in regression models because of the high prevalence of ASD in males and lack of an underlying hypothesis to link patient sex with continuity of care in young children. Model 1 compared CoC (total and well-care only) across the three patient cohorts while adjusting for patient age, medical insurance, practice affiliation, and number of visits. To mitigate the observed difference in age distribution across the cohorts, likely stemming from the fact that both ASD and asthma are usually not diagnosed in the first 2 years of life, we performed a sensitivity analysis in which we included only patients who reached a minimum age of 2 years during the study period (Model 2). To further explore the influence of insurance type on total continuity of care, a post-hoc analysis was completed, in which the regression model was implemented after patients were stratified based on insurance type (Model 3). Since CoC was not normally distributed across this finite sample, we recognized that asymptotic normality might not hold.22,23 Therefore, we used bootstrapping to calculate the standard errors of every model for valid inference.24 All analyses were conducted using R, version 3.6.2.25 ## Results Of 30,678 eligible children aged 0 to 8 years, 1,875 (6.1%) were classified with Asthma, 294 (1.0%) with ASD, and 15,465 (50.4%) as Controls. Table 1 describes patient and clinical care characteristics of the three cohorts. Patients in the Control cohort were younger than the Asthma and ASD cohorts (standardized mean difference (SMD)=0.44). The ASD cohort was predominantly male (78.2%); both Asthma and ASD had a higher percent of publicly insured patients (25.3% and 23.8%) compared to Controls (14.9%). The number of patients that switched between private and public insurance during the study period did not differ across the three cohorts (Asthma=77 (4.1%), ASD=11 (3.7%), Controls=371 (2.4%), SMD=0.06). Total visits in the study period for Asthma averaged 17.4 compared to 14.0 for ASD and 11.4 for Controls (SMD=0.41). Number of same day sick visits did not differ across the cohorts (Asthma=11,336 (45.9%), ASD=1,301 (44.9%), Controls=39,989 (43.0%), SMD=0.04). View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/08/2021.02.04.21251018/T1) Table 1. Patient and clinical care characteristics of study cohorts aged 0-8 years Total CoC as measured by the UPC score was lower in children with Asthma and ASD (Mean (M)=0.57, Standard Deviation (SD) 0.20; M=0.58, SD 0.21) compared to Controls (M=0.66, SD 0.21); SMD=0.26. Differences among well-care CoC were less pronounced (Asthma M=0.80, ASD M =0.78, Control M=0.82; SMD=0.11). To examine differences in total CoC across the 10 primary care practices, we stratified patient UPC scores by practice. Figure 2a illustrates the high variation in total CoC across the practices, ranging from an average UPC of 0.5 in three practices to 0.78 in one practice. The number of PCPs in each practice ranged from 6 to 37. The number of PCPs per practice was positively correlated with the practice UPC score, but the correlation did not reach statistical significance (R=0.59, 95% CI −0.89, −0.06, p=0.071). In Figure 2b, we further stratified total CoC by patient cohort (Asthma, ASD, Controls), demonstrating a persistent pattern of total CoC across patient cohorts in most practices (Asthma