Health-care-Related Practices in Virtual Behavioral Health Treatment for Major Depression Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The abrupt shift to virtual care at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic had the potential to disrupt care practices in virtual behavioral health encounters. We examined changes over time in virtual behavioral health-care-related practices for patient encounters with diagnoses of major depression. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized electronic health record data from 3 integrated health care systems. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for covariates across 3 time periods, prepandemic (January 2019-March 2020), peak-pandemic shift to virtual care (April 2020-June 2020), and recovery of health care operations (July 2020-June 2021). First virtual follow-up behavioral health department encounters after an incident diagnostic encounter were examined for differences across the time periods in rates of antidepressant medication orders and fulfillments, and completion of patient-reported symptoms screeners in service of measurement-based care. RESULTS: Antidepressant medication orders declined modestly but significantly in 2 of the 3 systems during the peak-pandemic period but rebounded during the recovery period. There were no significant changes in patient fulfillment of ordered antidepressant medications. Completion of symptom screeners increased significantly in all 3 systems during the peak-pandemic period and continued to increase significantly in the subsequent period. CONCLUSIONS: A rapid shift to virtual behavioral health care was possible without compromising health-care-related practices. The transition and subsequent adjustment period have instead been marked by improved adherence to measurement-based care practices in virtual visits, signaling a potential new capacity for virtual health care delivery.

Virtual Care and Urinary Tract Infection Management: Comparing Ancillary Service Orders and Patient Order Fulfillments Between Virtual and In-person Encounters During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, more health care issues were being managed remotely. Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are being managed more often using telehealth although few reports compare the rate of UTI ancillary service orders placed and fulfilled during these visits. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate and compare the rate of ancillary service orders and order fulfillments in incident UTI diagnoses between virtual and in-person encounters. RESEARCH DESIGN: The retrospective cohort study involved 3 integrated health care systems: Kaiser Permanente (KP) Colorado, KP Georgia, and KP Mid-Atlantic States. SUBJECTS: We included incident UTI encounters from adult primary care data from January 2019 to June 2021. MEASURES: Data were categorized as: prepandemic (January 2019-March 2020), COVID-19 Era 1 (April 2020-June 2020), and COVID-19 Era 2 (July 2020-June 2021). UTI-specific ancillary services included medication, laboratory, and imaging. Orders and order fulfillments were dichotomized for analyses. Weighted percentages for orders and fulfillments were calculated using inverse probability treatment weighting from logistic regression and compared between virtual and in-person encounters using χ2 tests. RESULTS: We identified 123,907 incident encounters. Virtual encounters increased from 13.4% prepandemic to 39.1% in COVID-19 Era 2. Ancillary service orders from virtual encounters were not placed as often as in-person encounters. However, the weighted percentage for ancillary service order fulfillment across all services remained above 65.3% across sites and eras, with many fulfillment percentages above 90%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reported a high rate of order fulfillment for both virtual and in-person encounters. Health care systems should encourage providers to place ancillary service orders for uncomplicated diagnoses, such as UTI, to provide enhanced access to patient-centered care.

Management of Neck or Back Pain in Ambulatory Care: Did Visit Mode or the COVID-19 Pandemic Affect Provider Practice or Patient Adherence?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: In recent years, 2 circumstances have changed provider-patient interactions in ambulatory care: (1) the replacement of virtual for in-person visits and (2) the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied the potential impact of each event on provider practice and patient adherence by comparing the frequency of the association of provider orders, and patient fulfillment of those orders, by visit mode and pandemic period, for incident neck or back pain (NBP) visits in ambulatory care. METHODS: Data were extracted from the electronic health records of 3 Kaiser Permanente regions (Colorado, Georgia, and Mid-Atlantic States) from January 2017 to June 2021. Incident NBP visits were defined from ICD-10 coded as primary or first listed diagnoses on adult, family medicine, or urgent care visits separated by at least 180 days. Visit modes were classified as virtual or in-person. Periods were classified as prepandemic (before April 2020 or the beginning of the national emergency) or recovery (after June 2020). Percentages of provider orders for, and patient fulfillment of orders, were measured for 5 service classes and compared on: virtual versus in-person visits, and prepandemic versus recovery periods. Comparisons were balanced on patient case-mix using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Ancillary services in all 5 categories at each of the 3 Kaiser Permanente regions were substantially ordered less frequently on virtual compared with in-person visits in both the prepandemic and recovery periods (both P ≤ 0.001). Conditional on an order, patient fulfillment within 30 days was high (typically ≥70%) and not likely meaningfully different between visit modes or pandemic periods. CONCLUSIONS: Ancillary services for incident NBP visits were ordered less frequently during virtual than in-person visits in both prepandemic and recovery periods. Patient fulfillment of orders was high, and not significantly different by mode or period.

Did Access to Ambulatory Care Moderate the Associations Between Visit Mode and Ancillary Services Utilization Across the COVID-19 Pandemic Period?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: In recent years, 2 circumstances changed provider-patient interactions in primary care: the substitution of virtual (eg, video) for in-person visits and the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied whether access to care might affect patient fulfillment of ancillary services orders for ambulatory diagnosis and management of incident neck or back pain (NBP) and incident urinary tract infection (UTI) for virtual versus in-person visits. METHODS: Data were extracted from the electronic health records of 3 Kaiser Permanente Regions to identify incident NBP and UTI visits from January 2016 through June 2021. Visit modes were classified as virtual (Internet-mediated synchronous chats, telephone visits, or video visits) or in-person. Periods were classified as prepandemic [before the beginning of the national emergency (April 2020)] or recovery (after June 2020). Percentages of patient fulfillment of ancillary services orders were measured for 5 service classes each for NBP and UTI. Differences in percentages of fulfillments were compared between modes within periods and between periods within the mode to assess the possible impact of 3 moderators: distance from residence to primary care clinic, high deductible health plan (HDHP) enrollment, and prior use of a mail-order pharmacy program. RESULTS: For diagnostic radiology, laboratory, and pharmacy services, percentages of fulfilled orders were generally >70-80%. Given an incident NBP or UTI visit, longer distance to the clinic and higher cost-sharing due to HDHP enrollment did not significantly suppress patients' fulfillment of ancillary services orders. Prior use of mail-order prescriptions significantly promoted medication order fulfillments on virtual NBP visits compared with in-person NBP visits in the prepandemic period (5.9% vs. 2.0%, P=0.01) and in the recovery period (5.2% vs. 1.6%, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Distance to the clinic or HDHP enrollment had minimal impact on the fulfillment of diagnostic or prescribed medication services associated with incident NBP or UTI visits delivered virtually or in-person; however, prior use of mail-order pharmacy option promoted fulfillment of prescribed medication orders associated with NBP visits.

Patient Factors Associated With Use of Adult Primary Care and Virtual Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The delivery of adult primary care (APC) shifted from predominately in-person to modes of virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is unclear how these shifts impacted the likelihood of APC use during the pandemic, or how patient characteristics may be associated with the use of virtual care. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using person-month level datasets from 3 geographically disparate integrated health care systems was conducted for the observation period of January 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021. We estimated a 2-stage model, first adjusting for patient-level sociodemographic, clinical, and cost-sharing factors, using generalized estimating equations with a logit distribution, along with a second-stage multinomial generalized estimating equations model that included an inverse propensity score treatment weight to adjust for the likelihood of APC use. Factors associated with APC use and virtual care use were separately assessed for the 3 sites. RESULTS: Included in the first-stage models were datasets with total person-months of 7,055,549, 11,014,430, and 4,176,934, respectively. Older age, female sex, greater comorbidity, and Black race and Hispanic ethnicity were associated with higher likelihood of any APC use in any month; measures of greater patient cost-sharing were associated with a lower likelihood. Conditional on APC use, older age, and adults identifying as Black, Asian, or Hispanic were less likely to use virtual care. CONCLUSIONS: As the transition in health care continues to evolve, our findings suggest that to ensure vulnerable patient groups receive high quality health care, outreach interventions to reduce barriers to virtual care use may be warranted.

Factor Analysis in Distinguishing Coronavirus Disease 2019 From Other Influenza-like Illness Using a Validated Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument FLU-PRO Plus: A Prospective Real-world Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: InFLUenza Patient-reported Outcome (FLU-PRO Plus) is a 34-item patient-reported outcome instrument designed to capture the intensity and frequency of viral respiratory symptoms. This study evaluates whether FLU-PRO Plus responses could discriminate between symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza-like illness (ILI) with no COVID diagnosis, as well as forecast disease progression. METHODS: FLU-PRO Plus was administered daily for 14 days. Exploratory factor analysis was used to reduce the FLU-PRO Plus responses on the first day to 3 factors interpreted as "symptom clusters." The 3 clusters were used to predict COVID-19 versus ILI diagnosis in logistic regression. Correlation between the clusters and quality of life (QoL) measures was used to assess concurrent validity. The timing of self-reported return to usual health in the 14-day period was estimated as a function of the clusters within COVID-19 and ILI groups. RESULTS: Three hundred fourteen patients completed day 1 FLU-PRO Plus, of which 65% had a COVID-19 diagnosis. Exploratory factor analysis identified 3 symptom clusters: (1)general Body, (2) tracheal/bronchial, and (3) nasopharyngeal. Higher nasopharyngeal scores were associated with higher odds of COVID-19 compared with ILI diagnosis [adjusted odds ratio = 1.61 (1.21, 2.12)]. Higher tracheal/bronchial scores were associated with lower odds of COVID-19 [0.58 (0.44, 0.77)]. The 3 symptom clusters were correlated with multiple QoL measures ( r = 0.14-0.56). Higher scores on the general body and tracheal/bronchial symptom clusters were associated with prolonged time to return to usual health [adjusted hazard ratios: 0.76 (0.64, 0.91), 0.80 (0.67, 0.96)]. CONCLUSION: Three symptom clusters identified from FLU-PRO Plus responses successfully discriminated patients with COVID-19 from non-COVID ILI and were associated with QoL and predicted symptom duration.

Impact of COVID-19 on Trends in Outpatient Clinic Utilization: A Tale of 2 Departments.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced many US health care organizations to shift from mostly in-person care to a hybrid of virtual visits (VV) and in-person visits (IPV). While there was an expected and immediate shift to virtual care (VC) early in the pandemic, little is known about trends in VC use after restrictions eased. METHODS: This is a retrospective study using data from 3 health care systems. All completed visits from adult primary care (APC) and behavioral health (BH) were extracted from the electronic health record of adults aged 19 years and older from January 1, 2019 to June 30, 2021. Standardized weekly visit rates were calculated by department and site and analyzed using time series analysis. RESULTS: There was an immediate decrease in APC visits following the onset of the pandemic. IPV were quickly replaced by VV such that VV accounted for most APC visits early in the pandemic. By 2021, VV rates declined, and VC visits accounted for <50% of all APC visits. By Spring 2021, all 3 health care systems saw a resumption of APC visits as rates neared or returned to prepandemic levels. In contrast, BH visit rates remained constant or slightly increased. By April 2020, almost all BH visits were being delivered virtually at each of the 3 sites and continue to do so without changes to utilization. CONCLUSIONS: VC use peaked during the early pandemic period. While rates of VC are higher than prepandemic levels, IPV are the predominant visit type in APC. In contrast, VC use has sustained in BH, even after restrictions eased.

The bidirectional association between diabetes and long-COVID-19 - A systematic review.

Some evidence suggests that diabetes may be a risk factor for the development of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). Recent data also indicate that new-onset diabetes may be a complication of COVID-19. Here, we review the existing evidence. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review through August 8, 2022. We included longitudinal studies reporting on the risk of PASC (i.e., sequelae that extend beyond four weeks after initial infection) in people with and without diabetes, and studies reporting on the risk of new-onset diabetes in people with vs without COVID-19 with a minimum of 4-weeks of follow-up. All studies were published in English. Among 5,532 studies screened, 39 were included in the final review. Among 25 studies reporting on diabetes and PASC, 44 % (n = 11) identified diabetes as a significant risk factor for PASC (increased relative risk ranging from 7 % to 342 %) while 56 % (n = 14) did not. Among 14 studies reporting on new-onset diabetes, 12 (86 %) reported that COVID-19 (vs no COVID) was significantly associated with new-onset diabetes with increased risks ranging from 11 % to 276 %. COVID-19 survivors may be at increased risk for new-onset diabetes, but whether pre-existing diabetes is also a risk factor for PASC remains unclear.

Diabetes as a Risk Factor for Long-COVID-19-A Scoping Review

Background: Diabetes is a key risk factor for severe COVID-19 (i.e., hospitalization, mortality) . Whether diabetes is also a risk factor for post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) , also known as long COVID, is unknown. Methods: We conducted a scoping literature review on January 27, 2022 using the keyword terms 'long hauler', 'long COVID-19', 'post-acute sequalae', and 'persistent COVID-19' combined with the operator OR, with AND 'diabetes', AND 'COVID-19 [MeSH Term]'. We included all peer-reviewed full-text observational research studies published in English between January 1, 2020 and January 27, 2022 that reported on the risk of PASC in people with and without diabetes with a minimum of 4-weeks follow-up after COVID-19 diagnosis, and narratively synthesized results. Results: Among 39 studies identified, seven were included in the review and are summarized in Table 1. Overall, we found that 43% of studies identified diabetes as a potent risk factor for PASC (all odds ratios were >4) . However, this conclusion is limited by the heterogeneity of studies with regard to PASC definitions (e.g., ongoing symptoms of fatigue, cough, dyspnea etc.) , populations at risk (hospitalized vs. non-hospitalized populations) , and follow-up times (range 4 weeks to 7 months) . Conclusions: More high-quality studies across multiple populations and settings are needed to determine if diabetes is indeed a risk factor for PASC. In the meantime, careful monitoring of people with diabetes for development of PASC may be advised.