SPUR: psychometric properties of a patient-reported outcome measure of medication adherence in type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Poor medication adherence is associated with worsening patient health outcomes and increasing healthcare costs. A holistic tool to assess both medication adherence and drivers of adherence behaviour has yet to be developed. This study aimed to examine SPUR, a multifactorial patient-reported outcome measure of medication adherence in patients living with type 2 diabetes, with a view to develop a suitable model for psychometric analysis.Furthermore, the study aimed to explore the relationship between the SPUR model and socio-clinical factors of medication adherence. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study recruited 378 adult patients living with type 2 diabetes from a mix of community and secondary-care settings to participate in this non-interventional cross-sectional study. The original SPUR-45 tool was completed by participants with other patient-reported outcome measures for comparison, in addition to the collection of two objective adherence measures; HbA1c and the medication possession ratio (MPR). RESULTS: Factor and reliability analysis conducted on SPUR-45 produced a revised and more concise version (27-items) of the tool, SPUR-27, which was psychometrically assessed. SPUR-27 observed strong internal consistency with significant correlations to the other psychometric measures (Beliefs about Medication Questionnaire, Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, Medicine Adherence Rating Scale) completed by participants. Higher SPUR-27 scores were associated with lower HbA1c values and a higher MPR, as well as other predicted socio-clinical factors such as higher income, increased age and lower body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: SPUR-27 demonstrated strong psychometric properties. Further work should look to examine the test-retest reliability of the model as well as examine transferability to other chronic conditions and broader population samples. Overall, the initial findings suggest that SPUR-27 is a reliable model for the multifactorial assessment of medication adherence among patients living with type 2 diabetes.

Minnesota Electronic Health Record Consortium COVID-19 Project: Informing Pandemic Response Through Statewide Collaboration Using Observational Data.

OBJECTIVE: Robust disease and syndromic surveillance tools are underdeveloped in the United States, as evidenced by limitations and heterogeneity in sociodemographic data collection throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. To monitor the COVID-19 pandemic in Minnesota, we developed a federated data network in March 2020 using electronic health record (EHR) data from 8 multispecialty health systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this serial cross-sectional study, we examined patients of all ages who received a COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test, had symptoms of a viral illness, or received an influenza test from January 3, 2016, through November 7, 2020. We evaluated COVID-19 testing rates among patients with symptoms of viral illness and percentage positivity among all patients tested, in aggregate and by zip code. We stratified results by patient and area-level characteristics. RESULTS: Cumulative COVID-19 positivity rates were similar for people aged 12-64 years (range, 15.1%-17.6%) but lower for adults aged ≥65 years (range, 9.3%-10.7%). We found notable racial and ethnic disparities in positivity rates early in the pandemic, whereas COVID-19 positivity was similarly elevated across most racial and ethnic groups by the end of 2020. Positivity rates remained substantially higher among Hispanic patients compared with other racial and ethnic groups throughout the study period. We found similar trends across area-level income and rurality, with disparities early in the pandemic converging over time. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We rapidly developed a distributed data network across Minnesota to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings highlight the utility of using EHR data to monitor the current pandemic as well as future public health priorities. Building partnerships with public health agencies can help ensure data streams are flexible and tailored to meet the changing needs of decision makers.

Professional roles and relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study among US clinicians.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed healthcare delivery in the USA, but there has been little empirical work describing the impact of these changes on clinicians. We conducted a study to address the following question: how has the pandemic impacted US clinicians' professional roles and relationships? DESIGN: Inductive thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Clinical settings across the USA in April and May of 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians with leadership and/or clinical roles during the COVID-19 pandemic. MEASURES: Emergent themes related to professional roles and relationships. RESULTS: Sixty-one clinicians participated in semi-structured interviews. Study participants were practising in 15 states across the USA, and the majority were White physicians from large academic centres. Three overlapping and inter-related themes emerged from qualitative analysis of interview transcripts: (1) disruption: boundaries between work and home life became blurred and professional identity and usual clinical roles were upended; (2) constructive adaptation: some clinicians were able to find new meaning in their work and described a spirit of collaboration, shared goals, open communication and mutual respect among colleagues; and (3) discord and estrangement: other clinicians felt alienated from their clinical roles and experienced demoralising work environments marked by division, value conflicts and mistrust. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians encountered marked disruption of their professional roles, identities and relationships during the pandemic to which they and their colleagues responded in a range of different ways. Some described a spirit of collaboration and camaraderie, while others felt alienated by their new roles and experienced work environments marked by division, value conflicts and mistrust. Our findings highlight the importance of effective teamwork and efforts to support clinician well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic.