Intensivist physician-to-patient ratios and mortality in the intensive care unit.

PURPOSE: A high daily census may hinder the ability of physicians to deliver quality care in the intensive care unit (ICU). We sought to determine the relationship between intensivist-to-patient ratios and mortality among ICU patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of intensivist-to-patient ratios in 29 ICUs in 10 hospitals in the United States from 2018 to 2020. We used meta-data from progress notes in the electronic health record to determine an intensivist-specific caseload for each ICU day. We then fit a multivariable proportional hazards model with time-varying covariates to estimate the relationship between the daily intensivist-to-patient ratio and ICU mortality at 28 days. RESULTS: The final analysis included 51,656 patients, 210,698 patient days, and 248 intensivist physicians. The average caseload per day was 11.8 (standard deviation: 5.7). There was no association between the intensivist-to-patient ratio and mortality (hazard ratio for each additional patient: 0.987, 95% confidence interval: 0.968-1.007, p = 0.2). This relationship persisted when we defined the ratio as caseload over the sample-wide average (hazard ratio: 0.907, 95% confidence interval: 0.763-1.077, p = 0.26) and cumulative days with a caseload over the sample-wide average (hazard ratio: 0.991, 95% confidence interval: 0.966-1.018, p = 0.52). The relationship was not modified by the presence of physicians-in-training, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants (p value for interaction term: 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality for ICU patients appears resistant to high intensivist caseloads. These results may not generalize to ICUs organized differently than those in this sample, such as ICUs outside the United States.

Changes in Urologic Cancer Surgical Volume and Length of Stay During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Pennsylvania.

Importance: Disruptions in cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread deferrals and cancellations, creating a surgical backlog that presents a challenge for health care institutions moving into the recovery phase of the pandemic. Objective: To describe patterns in surgical volume and postoperative length of stay for major urologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study identified 24 001 patients 18 years or older from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council database with kidney cancer, prostate cancer, or bladder cancer who received a radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, radical prostatectomy, or radical cystectomy between the first quarter (Q1) of 2016 and Q2 of 2021. Postoperative length of stay and adjusted surgical volumes were compared before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was adjusted surgical volume for radical and partial nephrectomy, radical prostatectomy, and radical cystectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary outcome was postoperative length of stay. Results: A total of 24 001 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [9.4] years; 3522 women [15%], 19 845 White patients [83%], 17 896 living in urban areas [75%]) received major urologic cancer surgery between Q1 of 2016 and Q2 of 2021. Of these, 4896 radical nephrectomy, 3508 partial nephrectomy, 13 327 radical prostatectomy, and 2270 radical cystectomy surgical procedures were performed. There were no statistically significant differences in patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, urban or rural status, or Elixhauser Comorbidity Index scores between patients who received surgery before and patients who received surgery during the pandemic. For partial nephrectomy, a baseline of 168 surgeries per quarter decreased to 137 surgeries per quarter in Q2 and Q3 of 2020. For radical prostatectomy, a baseline of 644 surgeries per quarter decreased to 527 surgeries per quarter in Q2 and Q3 of 2020. However, the likelihood of receiving radical nephrectomy (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.28), partial nephrectomy (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.27), radical prostatectomy (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.22-3.22), or radical cystectomy (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.53) was unchanged. Length of stay for partial nephrectomy decreased from baseline by a mean of 0.7 days (95% CI, -1.2 to -0.2 days) during the pandemic. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that partial nephrectomy and radical prostatectomy surgical volume decreased during the peak waves of COVID-19, as did postoperative length of stay for partial nephrectomy.

Telemedicine Visits to Children During the Pandemic: Practice-Based Telemedicine Versus Telemedicine-Only Providers.

OBJECTIVE: In March 2020, regulatory and payment changes allowed "brick and mortar" pediatric practices to offer practice-based telemedicine for the first time, joining direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine vendors in the ability to offer visits for common acute pediatric concerns via telemedicine. We sought to characterize the relative contribution of practice-based telemedicine versus commercial DTC telemedicine models in provision of children's telemedicine from 2018 through 2021. METHODS: Using January 2018 to September 2021 data from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database, we identified telemedicine visits by children ≤17, excluding preventive visits and visits to specialists, emergency departments, and urgent care. Among included visits, we defined "telemedicine-only" providers as those with ≥80% of visits via telemedicine and practice-based telemedicine providers as those with ≤50% of visits via telemedicine. We then described the telemedicine visit volume and diagnoses for these categories overall and per 1000 children per month. RESULTS: From January 2018 to February 2020, telemedicine-only providers accounted for 57,815 telemedicine visits (90.8%), while practice-based telemedicine accounted for 4192 telemedicine visits (6.6%). From March 2020 to September 2021, telemedicine-only providers accounted for 38,282 telemedicine visits (6.1%), while practice-based telemedicine accounted for 555,125 telemedicine visits (88.2%). Per month, telemedicine visits to practice-based telemedicine providers increased from pre-pandemic to pandemic periods (0.1 vs 12.9 visits per 1000 children/month), while telemedicine visits to telemedicine-only providers occurred at a similar rate from pre-pandemic to pandemic periods (0.92 vs 0.96 visits per 1000 children/month). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a large increase in telemedicine visits during the pandemic, with the growth in visits exclusively occurring among visits to practice-based telemedicine providers as opposed to telemedicine-only providers.

Patient and Family Factors Associated with Use of Telemedicine Visits for Pediatric Acute Respiratory Tract Infections, 2018-2019.

Background: Pediatric acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) were a common reason for commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine use before the COVID-19 pandemic, but the factors associated with this use are unknown. Objective: To identify child and family factors associated with use of commercial DTC telemedicine for ARTIs in 2018-2019. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of claims data from the Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart Database. Among children with ARTI visits, we fitted logit models to examine child and family characteristics associated with DTC telemedicine use. Results: Of 660,725 children with ARTI visits, 12,944 (2.0%) had ≥1 commercial DTC telemedicine encounter. The odds of DTC telemedicine use were higher for children with age ≥12 years, lower parent educational attainment, higher household income, white non-Hispanic race/ethnicity, and residency in the West South Central census division. Conclusion: In 2018-2019, commercial DTC telemedicine use varied with child age, child race/ethnicity parent educational attainment, household income, and geography.

Parent-Reported Use of Pediatric Primary Care Telemedicine: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine delivered from primary care practices became widely available for children during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Focusing on children with a usual source of care, we aimed to examine factors associated with use of primary care telemedicine. METHODS: In February 2022, we surveyed parents of children aged ≤17 years on the AmeriSpeak panel, a probability-based panel of representative US households, about their children's telemedicine use. We first compared sociodemographic factors among respondents who did and did not report a usual source of care for their children. Among those reporting a usual source of care, we used Rao-Scott F tests to examine factors associated with parent-reported use versus nonuse of primary care telemedicine for their children. RESULTS: Of 1206 respondents, 1054 reported a usual source of care for their children. Of these respondents, 301 of 1054 (weighted percentage 28%) reported primary care telemedicine visits for their children. Factors associated with primary care telemedicine use versus nonuse included having a child with a chronic medical condition (87/301, weighted percentage 27% vs 113/753, 15%, respectively; P=.002), metropolitan residence (262/301, weighted percentage 88% vs 598/753, 78%, respectively; P=.004), greater internet connectivity concerns (60/301, weighted percentage 24% vs 116/753, 16%, respectively; P=.05), and greater health literacy (285/301, weighted percentage 96% vs 693/753, 91%, respectively; P=.005). CONCLUSIONS: In a national sample of respondents with a usual source of care for their children, approximately one-quarter reported use of primary care telemedicine for their children as of 2022. Equitable access to primary care telemedicine may be enhanced by promoting access to primary care, sustaining payment for primary care telemedicine, addressing barriers in nonmetropolitan practices, and designing for lower health-literacy populations.

Comparing the effectiveness of Family Support for Health Action (FAM-ACT) with traditional community health worker-led interventions to improve adult diabetes management and outcomes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) programs have struggled to deliver sustainable, effective support for adults with diabetes (AWDs) to improve self-management behaviors, achieve glycemic goals, and reduce risk for complications. One largely untapped resource for this support is AWDs' social networks. Fifty to 75% of AWDs have an unpaid family member or friend ("support person") who provides ongoing help with diabetes management. However, DSMES interventions to date lack structured and effective approaches to directly engage support persons in AWDs' diabetes management. METHODS: This parallel arm randomized trial is designed to determine the effectiveness of Family Support for Health Action (FAM-ACT), a novel community health worker (CHW)-delivered program focused on educating and supporting patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and their support persons (SPs), relative to an established, CHW-delivered, individual patient-focused DSMES and care management (I-DSMES) intervention. Both interventions were developed using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach. The study will be conducted in partnership with an urban Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) serving a low-income, Latino/a community, with target enrollment of 268 dyads consisting of an FQHC patient with T2D with high HbA1c and an SP. Patient-SP dyads will be randomized to receive FAM-ACT or I-DSMES over 6 months. The primary outcome is change in patient HbA1c from baseline to 6 months. Secondary patient outcomes include 12-month change in HbA1c, changes in patient blood pressure, diabetes self-management behaviors, diabetes distress, patient activation, diabetes self-efficacy, and perceptions of and satisfaction with SP support for diabetes. Secondary SP outcomes include self-efficacy for helping the patient with diabetes management and SP distress about the patient's diabetes. We also will assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient's ability to manage diabetes. DISCUSSION: This study will inform scalable, evidence-based approaches that leverage family support to help AWDs improve and sustain self-management strategies that underpin optimal management of multiple diabetes complication risk factors. The protocol is designed for and evaluated with a low-income and predominantly Latino/a community, which may increase applicability to other similar communities. The COVID-19 pandemic presented several challenges to study protocol and intervention delivery; modifications made to address these challenges are described. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03812614. Registered on 18 January 2019.

Psychosocial Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients with End-Stage Kidney Disease on Hemodialysis.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have a negative effect on the mental and social health of patients with ESKD on chronic in-center hemodialysis (HD), who have a high burden of psychologic symptoms at baseline and unavoidable treatment-related COVID exposures. The goal of our study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychosocial health of patients on chronic in-center HD. Methods: Participants enrolled in the ongoing Technology Assisted Collaborative Care (TACcare) trial in Western Pennsylvania and New Mexico were approached for participation in a phone survey in May 2020. Data on the pandemic's effects on participants' physical and mental health, symptoms (such as anxiety, mood, loneliness, sleep, and stress), and food and housing security were collected. Results: Surveys were completed by 49 participants (mean age 56 years; 53% men, 18% Black, 20% American Indian, and 22% Hispanic). Almost 80% of participants reported being moderately to extremely worried about the pandemic's effects on their mental/emotional health and interpersonal relationships. More than 85% of the participants were worried about obtaining their dialysis treatments due to infection risk from close contact in the dialysis facility or during transportation. Despite this, 82% of participants reported being not at all/slightly interested in trying home dialysis as an alternative option. Overall, 27% of the participants had clinical levels of depressive symptoms but only 12% had anxiety meeting clinical criteria. About 33% of participants reported poor sleep quality over the last month. Perceived stress was high in about 30% of participants and 85% felt overwhelmed by difficulties with COVID-19, although 41% felt that things were fairly/very often going their way. Conclusions: Our study provides preliminary insights into the psychosocial distress caused by the COVID-19 pandemic among a diverse cohort of patients receiving chronic HD who are participating in an ongoing clinical trial.

Changes in Self-management During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes at a Federally Qualified Health Center.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected how adults with diabetes perform self-management, and impacts may be greater among vulnerable populations. We assessed the impact of the pandemic on diabetes self-management among adults with type 2 diabetes at a Federally Qualified Health Center. Participants were surveyed by phone in Spanish and English from July to October of 2020. Most respondents (74%) were Latino and preferred to speak Spanish, with mean age of 54 years and mean HbA1c of 9.2%. Fifty-three percent reported less physical activity during the pandemic. While 43% had more difficulty obtaining healthy food, 38% reported eating more healthfully. Sixty-one percent had increased difficulty accessing medical care. Many felt more socially isolated (49%) and stressed (51%). Changes in diabetes self-management were both positive and negative for majority Latino patients in this low-resource community, which may require tailored approaches to mitigate negative impacts of the pandemic on physical and mental health.

Referral pattern for urologic malignancies before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has required significant restructuring of healthcare with conservation of resources and maintaining social distancing standards. With these new initiatives, it is conceivable that the diagnosis of cancer care may be delayed. We aimed to evaluate differences in patient populations being evaluated for cancer before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a retrospective review of our electronic medical record and examined patient characteristics of those presenting for a possible new cancer diagnosis to our urologic oncology clinic. Data was analyzed using logistic and linear regression models. RESULTS: During the 3-month period before the COVID-19 pandemic began, 585 new patients were seen in one urologic oncology practice. The following 3-month period, during the COVID-19 pandemic, 362 patients were seen, corresponding to a 38% decline. Visits per week increased to pre-COVID-19 levels for kidney and bladder cancer as the county entered the green phase. Prostate cancer visits per week remained below pre-COVID-19 levels in the green phase. When the 2 populations pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 were compared, there were no notable differences on regression analysis. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic decreased the total volume of new patient referrals for possible genitourinary cancer diagnoses. The impact this will have on cancer survival remains to be determined.