Next Article in Journal
Is Obesity More Than a Double Burden among People with Mobility Disability? The Effect of Obesity on HRQoL and Participation in Society
Previous Article in Journal
Helping Health Services to Meet the Needs of Young People with Chronic Conditions: Towards a Developmental Model for Transition
Article Menu
Issue 4 (December) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Healthcare 2017, 5(4), 78;

Perceptions of Risk Stratification Workflows in Primary Care

Department of Medical Informatics & Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239-3098, USA
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Sampath Parthasarathy
Received: 6 September 2017 / Revised: 17 October 2017 / Accepted: 18 October 2017 / Published: 21 October 2017
Full-Text   |   PDF [858 KB, uploaded 21 October 2017]   |  


Risk stratification (RS) in primary care is frequently used by policy-makers, payers, and health systems; the process requires risk assessment for adverse health outcomes across a population to assign patients into risk tiers and allow care management (CM) resources to be targeted effectively. Our objective was to understand the approach to and perception of RS in primary care practices. An online survey was developed, tested, and administered to 148 representatives of 37 primary care practices engaged in RS varying in size, location and ownership. The survey assessed practices’ approach to, perception of, and confidence in RS, and its effect on subsequent CM activities. We examined psychometric properties of the survey to determine validity and conducted chi-square analyses to determine the association between practice characteristics and confidence and agreement with risk scores. The survey yielded a 68% response rate (100 respondents). Overall, participants felt moderately confident in their risk scores (range 41–53.8%), and moderately to highly confident in their subsequent CM workflows (range 46–68%). Respondents from small and independent practices were more likely to have higher confidence and agreement with their RS approaches and scores (p < 0.01). Confidence levels were highest, however, when practices incorporated human review into their RS processes (p < 0.05). This trend was not affected by respondents’ professional roles. Additional work from a broad mixed-methods effort will add to our understanding of RS implementation processes and outcomes. View Full-Text
Keywords: risk stratification; chronic care; primary care; forecasting; care management; risk assessment risk stratification; chronic care; primary care; forecasting; care management; risk assessment

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material


Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Ross, R.L.; Sachdeva, B.; Wagner, J.; Ramsey, K.; Dorr, D.A. Perceptions of Risk Stratification Workflows in Primary Care. Healthcare 2017, 5, 78.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Healthcare EISSN 2227-9032 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top