HIV Treatment Outcomes in POP-UP: Drop-in HIV Primary Care Model for People Experiencing Homelessness.

BACKGROUND: People with HIV experiencing homelessness have low rates of viral suppression, driven by sociostructural barriers and traditional care system limitations. Informed by the capability-opportunity-motivation-behavior (COM-B) model and patient preference research, we developed POP-UP, an integrated drop-in (nonappointment-based) HIV clinic with wrap-around services for persons with housing instability and viral nonsuppression in San Francisco. METHODS: We report HIV viral suppression (VS; <200 copies/mL), care engagement, and mortality at 12 months postenrollment. We used logistic regression to determine participant characteristics associated with VS. RESULTS: We enrolled 112 patients with viral nonsuppression and housing instability: 52% experiencing street-homelessness, 100% with a substance use disorder, and 70% with mental health diagnoses. At 12 months postenrollment, 70% had ≥1 visit each 4-month period, although 59% had a 90-day care gap; 44% had VS, 24% had viral nonsuppression, 23% missing, and 9% died (6 overdose, 2 AIDS-associated, 2 other). No baseline characteristics were associated with VS. CONCLUSIONS: The POP-UP low-barrier HIV care model successfully reached and retained some of our clinic's highest-risk patients. It was associated with VS improvement from 0% at baseline to 44% at 12 months among people with housing instability. Care gaps and high mortality from overdose remain major challenges to achieving optimal HIV treatment outcomes in this population.

Brief Report: Heterogeneous Preferences for Care Engagement Among People With HIV Experiencing Homelessness or Unstable Housing During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND/SETTING: In San Francisco, HIV viral suppression is 71% among housed individuals but only 20% among unhoused individuals. We conducted a discrete choice experiment at a San Francisco public HIV clinic to evaluate care preferences among people living with HIV (PLH) experiencing homelessness/unstable housing during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: From July to November 2020, we conducted a discrete choice experiment among PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing who accessed care through (1) an incentivized, drop-in program (POP-UP) or (2) traditional primary care. We investigated 5 program features: single provider vs team of providers; visit incentives ($0, $10, and $20); location (current site vs current + additional site); drop-in vs scheduled visits; in-person only vs optional telehealth visits; and navigator assistance. We estimated relative preferences using mixed-effects logistic regression and conducted latent class analysis to evaluate preference heterogeneity. RESULTS: We enrolled 115 PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing, 40% of whom lived outdoors. The strongest preferences were for the same provider (ß = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.41), visit incentives (ß = 0.56 per $5; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.66), and drop-in visits (ß = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.82). Telehealth was not preferred. Latent class analysis revealed 2 distinct groups: 78 (68%) preferred a flexible care model, whereas 37 (32%) preferred a single provider. CONCLUSIONS: We identified heterogeneous care preferences among PLH experiencing homelessness/unstable housing during the COVID-19 pandemic, with two-thirds preferring greater flexibility and one-third preferring provider continuity. Telehealth was not preferred, even with navigator facilitation. Including patient choice in service delivery design can improve care engagement, particularly for marginalized populations, and is an essential tool for ending the HIV epidemic.

Patient and caregiver factors in ambulatory incident reports: a mixed-methods analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Patients and caregivers are the primary stakeholders in ambulatory safety, given they perform daily chronic disease self-management, medication administration and outpatient follow-up. However, little attention has been given to their role in adverse events. We identified themes related to patient and caregiver factors and challenges in ambulatory safety incident reports from a Patient Safety Organization. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of ambulatory incident reports submitted to the Collaborative Healthcare Patient Safety Organization, including 450 hospitals or clinic members in 13 US states. We included events that had patient and/or caregiver behavioural, socioeconomic and clinical factors that may have contributed to the event. Two members of the team independently coded patient/caregiver factors, with dual coding of 20% of events. We then conducted a 'frequent item set' analysis to identify which factors most frequently co-occurred. We applied inductive analysis to the most frequent sets to interpret themes. Our team included a diverse stakeholder advisory council of patients, caregivers and healthcare staff. RESULTS: We analysed 522 incident reports and excluded 73 for a final sample of 449 events. Our co-occurrence analysis found the following three themes: (1) clinical advice may conflict with patient priorities; (2) breakdowns in communication and patient education cause medication adverse events and (3) patients with disabilities are vulnerable to the external environment. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory safety reports capture both structural and behavioural factors contributing to adverse events. Actionable takeaways include the following: improving clinician counselling of patients to convey medical advice to elicit priorities, enhanced education regarding medication adverse events and expanding safety precautions for patients with disabilities at home. Ambulatory safety reporting must include patients in reporting and event review for better mitigation of future harm.

Viral suppression during COVID-19 among people with HIV experiencing homelessness in a low-barrier clinic-based program.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) threatens to further worsen HIV outcomes among people experiencing homelessness. We conducted an interrupted time-series analysis of care engagement and viral suppression among unhoused individuals in the 'POP-UP' low-barrier, high-intensity HIV primary care program during COVID-19. Among 85 patients, care engagement and viral suppression did not decrease in the 5 months following implementation of San Francisco's 'shelter-in-place' ordinance. Low-barrier, in-person HIV care for homeless individuals may be important for maintaining HIV outcomes during COVID-19.

Correction: Recommendations From the Twitter Hashtag #DoctorsAreDickheads: Qualitative Analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/17595.].

Recommendations From the Twitter Hashtag #DoctorsAreDickheads: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The social media site Twitter has 145 million daily active users worldwide and has become a popular forum for users to communicate their health care concerns and experiences as patients. In the fall of 2018, a hashtag titled #DoctorsAreDickheads emerged, with almost 40,000 posts calling attention to health care experiences. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify common health care conditions and conceptual themes represented within the phenomenon of this viral Twitter hashtag. METHODS: We analyzed a random sample of 5.67% (500/8818) available tweets for qualitative analysis between October 15 and December 31, 2018, when the hashtag was the most active. Team coders reviewed the same 20.0% (100/500) tweets and the remainder individually. We abstracted the user's health care role and clinical conditions from the tweet and user profile, and used phenomenological content analysis to identify prevalent conceptual themes through sequential open coding, memoing, and discussion of concepts until an agreement was reached. RESULTS: Our final sample comprised 491 tweets and unique Twitter users. Of this sample, 50.5% (248/491) were from patients or patient advocates, 9.6% (47/491) from health care professionals, 4.3% (21/491) from caregivers, 3.7% (18/491) from academics or researchers, 1.0% (5/491) from journalists or media, and 31.6% (155/491) from non-health care individuals or other. The most commonly mentioned clinical conditions were chronic pain, mental health, and musculoskeletal conditions (mainly Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). We identified 3 major themes: disbelief in patients' experience and knowledge that contributes to medical errors and harm, the power inequity between patients and providers, and metacommentary on the meaning and impact of the #DoctorsAreDickheads hashtag. CONCLUSIONS: People publicly disclose personal and often troubling health care experiences on Twitter. This adds new accountability for the patient-provider interaction, highlights how harmful communication affects diagnostic safety, and shapes the public's viewpoint of how clinicians behave. Hashtags such as this offer valuable opportunities to learn from patient experiences. Recommendations include developing best practices for providers to improve communication, supporting patients through challenging diagnoses, and promoting patient engagement.

What Safety Events Are Reported For Ambulatory Care? Analysis of Incident Reports from a Patient Safety Organization.

INTRODUCTION: Health care staff document patient safety events using incident reporting systems, which are compiled within Patient Safety Organization databases. Researchers sought to describe the patterns and characteristics of incident reporting behaviors for ambulatory care from in-situ reporting systems from the United States. METHODS: The team analyzed safety reports in ambulatory settings collected from a Patient Safety Organization comprising 400 hospital members in 10 states, from May 2012 to October 2018. All events involving moderate harm, severe harm, and death were included, as well as subsamples of events with missing harm, no harm, and mild harm. The team deductively coded incident types and if patient or caregiver challenges were involved. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify predictors of higher harm (severe harm and death) among safety events reported. RESULTS: Of 2,701 events, there were 51 deaths, 159 severe harm events, 1,180 moderate harm, 926 mild harm, 384 no harm, and 1 unknown. Most were from outpatient subspecialty care, while 5.2% were from home/community, and 2.1% were from primary care. Medication-related events were most common (45.3%). In multivariate analysis, diagnostic errors (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 11.5), patient/caregiver challenges (aOR 2.2), and events in the home/community (aOR 2.0) and in psychiatric settings (aOR 5.0) were associated with higher harm. CONCLUSION: Outpatient reporting systems are limited for primary care and home/community settings, but ambulatory care systems report more harmful events related to diagnosis and patient and caregiver challenges. Improved standardization of reporting, focus on diagnosis, and novel approaches of safety reporting that engage patients will be necessary to improve capture of preventable events affecting patients and to develop system-level solutions.