Individual- and Neighborhood-Level Disparities in Audio-Only Telemedicine Utilization Across a Large Academic Health System.

Introduction: The objective of this study was to understand whether use of audio-only telemedicine visits differed by individual- and neighborhood-level patient characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of telemedicine encounter data from a large academic health system. The primary outcome was rate of audio-only versus video visits. The exposures of interest were individual- (age, race, insurance, preferred language) and neighborhood-level (Social Deprivation Index [SDI]) patient characteristics. Results: Our study included 1,054,465 patient encounters from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021, of which 18.33% were completed via audio-only. Encounters among adults 75 years or older, Black patients, Spanish-speakers, and those with public insurance were more frequently conducted by audio-only (p < 0.001). Overall, populations showed decreasing rates of audio-only visits over time. We also observed an increase in the rate of audio-only encounters as SDI scores increased. Discussion: We found that audio-only disparities exist in telemedicine utilization by individual and zip code level characteristics. Though these disparities have improved over time as seen by our temporal analysis, marginalized and minority groups still showed the lowest rates of video utilization. In conclusion, access to audio-only care is a critical component to ensure that telemedicine is accessible to all populations. State and federal policy should support continued reimbursement of audio-only care to ensure equitable access to care while the implications of different care modalities are further studied.

Predictor Variables Associated With Dermatology Referral Completion and the Impact on Surgical Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Delays or failure to complete a dermatologic referral may affect health care outcomes. Factors associated with these delays remain understudied. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated socioeconomic and demographic factors associated with delays or failure to complete dermatology referrals and potential impact on surgical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for 400 patients internally referred to an academic dermatology center from 19 primary-care clinics from July 2018 to June 2019. Only patients referred after an in-person primary-care visit in which the provider documented a specific concerning lesion were included. Multivariate analyses were performed to explore variables associated with delays or failure to complete dermatology referrals. RESULTS: Patients were more likely to complete their referral if they had a personal history (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 7.843, 95% CI 1.383-14.304) or family history (aOR = 11.307, 95% CI 2.344-20.27) of skin cancer. Patients were more likely to delay referral completion past 30 days if they were ages 18 to 34 (aOR = 6.665, 95% CI 1.285-12.044) and less likely to delay referral past 30 days if they had a previous history of skin cancer (aOR = 0.531, 95% CI 0.181-0.882). LIMITATIONS: Single institution, retrospective study, limited surgical patients. CONCLUSION: Understanding factors associated with delays in dermatology referral completion can help identify at-risk patient populations.

Will the Doctor "See" You Now? The Development and Implementation of a Targeted Telemedicine System for Primary Care.

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a rapid adoption of telehealth. For underserved populations lacking internet access, telemedicine was accomplished by phone rather than an audio-video connection. The latter is presumed a more effective form and better approximation of an in-person visit. We sought to provide a telehealth platform to overcome barriers for underserved groups to hold video visits with their health care providers and evaluate differences between the two telehealth modalities as assessed by physicians and patients. Methods: We designed a simplified tablet solution for video visits and piloted its use among patients who otherwise would have been completing audio-only visits. Patients consented to participation and were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to continue with their scheduled phone visit (control) versus being shipped a tablet to facilitate a video visit (intervention). Participants and providers completed communication and satisfaction surveys. Results: Tablet and connectivity design features included removal of all functions but for the telemedicine program, LTE always-on wireless internet connectivity, absence of external equipment (cords chargers and keyboard), and no registration with a digital portal. In total, 18 patients were enrolled. Intervention patients with video-enabled devices compared to control patients agreed more strongly that they were satisfied with their visits (4.75/5 vs. 3.75/5, p = 0.02). Conclusion: The delivered simplified tablet solution for video visits holds promise to improve access to video visits for underserved groups. Strategies to facilitate patient acceptance of devices are needed to expand the scope and potential impact of this effort.

Associations between the use of a real-time benefit tool and measures related to prescription obtainment found in order type subgroups.

BACKGROUND: The use of real-time benefit tool (RTBT) may help increase transparency of patients' out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, thereby reducing patients' OOP spend and increasing prescription obtainment. OBJECTIVE: We have previously reported on the potential benefit of RTBT in electronic health records at a large health system. We explore the benefit of RTBT by subgroups of prescriptions (i.e., order types). METHODS: In a retrospective cohort, we reviewed orders generated with and without RTBT use. We compared the 2 groups on key metrics related to prescription obtainment (fill rate, modification rate, cancellation rate, time to ready, time to sold, abandonment rate, and cancellation and transfer rate). Subgroup analysis included orders without over-the-counter (OTC) medications, orders without specialty medications, and orders without OTC and specialty medications. RESULTS: Fill rate, cancellation rate, time to ready, time to sold, abandonment rate, and cancellation and transfer rate were statistically significantly different between the RTBT and non-RTBT groups, favoring the RTBT group (all, P < 0.01). Differences in modification rates were not statistically significant between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: RTBTs have the potential to increase prescription obtainment. A consistent difference in key outcome measures between the RTBT and the non-RTBT groups was apparent among prescription orders regardless of whether OTC and specialty medications were included in the analysis.

Implementing real-time prescription benefit tools: Early experiences from 5 academic medical centers.

BACKGROUND: Medication price transparency tools are increasingly available, but data on their use, and their potential effects on prescribing behavior, patient out of pocket (OOP) costs, and clinician workflow integration, is limited. OBJECTIVE: To describe the implementation experiences with real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) tools at 5 large academic medical centers and their early impact on prescription ordering. DESIGN: and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, we systematically collected information on the characteristics of RTPB tools through discussions with key stakeholders at each of the five organizations. Quantitative encounter data, prescriptions written, and RTPB alerts/estimates and prescription adjustment rates were obtained at each organization in the first three months after "go-live" of the RTPB system(s) between 2019 and 2020. MAIN MEASURES: Implementation characteristics, prescription orders, cost estimate retrieval rates, and prescription adjustment rates. KEY RESULTS: Differences were noted with respect to implementation characteristics related to RTPB tools. All of the organizations with the exception of one chose to display OOP cost estimates and suggested alternative prescriptions automatically. Differences were also noted with respect to a patient cost threshold for automatic display. In the first three months after "go-live," RTPB estimate retrieval rates varied greatly across the five organizations, ranging from 8% to 60% of outpatient prescriptions. The prescription adjustment rate was lower, ranging from 0.1% to 4.9% of all prescriptions ordered. CONCLUSIONS: In this study reporting on the early experiences with RTPB tools across five academic medical centers, we found variability in implementation characteristics and population coverage. In addition RTPB estimate retrieval rates were highly variable across the five organizations, while rates of prescription adjustment ranged from low to modest.

Where Do Real-Time Prescription Benefit Tools Fit in the Landscape of High US Prescription Medication Costs? A Narrative Review.

The problem of unaffordable prescription medications in the United States is complex and can result in poor patient adherence to therapy, worse clinical outcomes, and high costs to the healthcare system. While providers are aware of the financial burden of healthcare for patients, there is a lack of actionable price transparency at the point of prescribing. Real-time prescription benefit (RTPB) tools are new electronic clinical decision support tools that retrieve patient- and medication-specific out-of-pocket cost information and display it to clinicians at the point of prescribing. The rise in US healthcare costs has been a major driver for efforts to increase medication price transparency, and mandates from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for Medicare Part D sponsors to adopt RTPB tools may spur integration of such tools into electronic health records. Although multiple factors affect the implementation of RTPB tools, there is limited evidence on outcomes. Further research will be needed to understand the impact of RTPB tools on end results such as prescribing behavior, out-of-pocket medication costs for patients, and adherence to pharmacologic treatment. We review the terminology and concepts essential in understanding the landscape of RTPB tools, implementation considerations, barriers to adoption, and directions for future research that will be important to patients, prescribers, health systems, and insurers.

Preoperative Patient Optimization in Total Joint Arthroplasty-The Paradigm Shift from Preoperative Clearance: A Narrative Review.

Background: Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the most common procedures performed in the United States. Outcomes of this elective procedure may be improved via preoperative optimization of modifiable risk factors. Purposes: We sought to summarize the literature on the clinical implications of preoperative risk factors in TJA and to develop recommendations regarding preoperative optimization of these risk factors. Methods: We searched PubMed in August 2019 with an update in September 2020 for English-language, peer-reviewed publications assessing the influence on outcomes in total hip and knee replacement of 7 preoperative risk factors-obesity, malnutrition, hypoalbuminemia, diabetes, anemia, smoking, and opioid use-and recommendations to mitigate them. Results: Sixty-nine studies were identified, including 3 randomized controlled trials, 8 prospective cohort studies, 42 retrospective studies, 6 systematic reviews, 3 narrative reviews, and 7 consensus guidelines. These studies described worse outcomes associated with these 7 risk factors, including increased rates of in-hospital complications, transfusions, periprosthetic joint infections, revisions, and deaths. Recommendations for strategies to screen and address these risk factors are provided. Conclusions: Risk factors can be optimized, with evidence suggesting the following thresholds prior to surgery: a body mass index <40 kg/m2, serum albumin ≥3.5 g/dL, hemoglobin A1C ≤7.5%, hemoglobin >12.0 g/dL in women and >13.0 g/dL in men, and smoking cessation and ≥50% decrease in opioid use by 4 weeks prior to surgery. Surgery should be delayed until these risk factors are adequately optimized.

Care for Incarcerated Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped health care delivery for all patients but has distinctly affected the most marginalized people in society. Incarcerated patients are both more likely to be infected and more likely to die from COVID-19. There is a paucity of guidance for the care of incarcerated patients hospitalized with COVID-19. This article will discuss how patient privacy, adequate communication, and advance care planning are rights that incarcerated patients may not experience during this pandemic. We highlight the role of compassionate release and note how COVID-19 may affect this prospect. A number of pragmatic recommendations are made to attenuate the discrepancy in hospital care experienced by those admitted from prisons and jails. Physicians must be familiar with the relevant hospital policies, be prepared to adapt their practices in order to overcome barriers to care, such as continuous shackling, and advocate to change these policies when they conflict with patient care. Stigma, isolation, and concerns over staff safety are shared experiences for COVID-19 and incarcerated patients, but incarcerated patients have been experiencing this treatment long before the current pandemic. It is crucial that the internist demand the equitable care that we seek for all our patients.

Delivering Complex Care: Designing for Patients and Physicians.

The management of high-utilizing patients is an area of active research with broad implications for the healthcare system. There are significant operational challenges to designing primary care models for these medically complex, high-needs patients. Although it is crucial to provide a high degree of continuity of care for this population, managing a cohort of these patients can lead to provider over-work and attrition. This may be magnified by the lack of training dedicated to addressing the unique care needs of these patients. While academic medical centers would seem well suited to care for individuals with multimorbidity needing intensive and specialized treatment, primary care providers in this setting need additional support to be clinically available for patients while pursuing scholarship and teaching. Formally recognizing intensive outpatient care as a specialty within internal medicine would help overcome some of these challenges. This would require a committed effort to high-level systems changes including a new focus on graduate medical education, the creation of division-level infrastructure within academic departments of medicine, and realistic levels of financial support to make this a viable career path.

Effect of Outpatient Note Templates on Note Quality: NOTE (Notation Optimization through Template Engineering) Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: This is the first randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of note template design on note quality using a simulated patient encounter and a validated assessment tool. OBJECTIVE: To compare note quality between two different templates using a novel randomized clinical simulation process. DESIGN: A randomized non-blinded controlled trial of a standard note template versus redesigned template. PARTICIPANTS: PGY 1-3 IM residents. INTERVENTIONS: Residents documented the simulated patient encounter using one of two templates. The standard template was modeled after the usual outpatient progress note. The new template placed the assessment and plan section in the beginning, grouped subjective data into the assessment, and deemphasized less useful elements. MAIN MEASURES: Note length; time to note completion; note template evaluation by resident authors; note evaluation by faculty reviewers. KEY RESULTS: 36 residents participated, 19 randomized to standard template, 17 to new. New template generated shorter notes (103 vs 285 lines, p < 0.001) that took the same time to complete (19.8 vs 21.6 min, p = 0.654). Using a 5-point Likert scale, residents considered new notes to have increased visual appeal (4 vs 3, p = 0.05) and less redundancy and clutter (4 vs 3, p = 0.006). Overall template satisfaction was not statistically different. Faculty reviewers rated the standard note more up-to-date (4.3 vs 2.7, p = 0.001), accurate (3.9 vs 2.6, p = 0.003), and useful (4 vs 2.8, p = 0.002), but less organized (3.3 vs 4.5, p < 0.001). Total quality was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: Residents rated the new note template more visually appealing, shorter, and less cluttered. Faculty reviewers rated both note types equivalent in the overall quality but rated new notes inferior in terms of accuracy and usefulness though better organized. This study demonstrates a novel method of a simulated clinical encounter to evaluate note templates before the introduction into practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04333238.

Feature engineering with clinical expert knowledge: A case study assessment of machine learning model complexity and performance.

Incorporating expert knowledge at the time machine learning models are trained holds promise for producing models that are easier to interpret. The main objectives of this study were to use a feature engineering approach to incorporate clinical expert knowledge prior to applying machine learning techniques, and to assess the impact of the approach on model complexity and performance. Four machine learning models were trained to predict mortality with a severe asthma case study. Experiments to select fewer input features based on a discriminative score showed low to moderate precision for discovering clinically meaningful triplets, indicating that discriminative score alone cannot replace clinical input. When compared to baseline machine learning models, we found a decrease in model complexity with use of fewer features informed by discriminative score and filtering of laboratory features with clinical input. We also found a small difference in performance for the mortality prediction task when comparing baseline ML models to models that used filtered features. Encoding demographic and triplet information in ML models with filtered features appeared to show performance improvements from the baseline. These findings indicated that the use of filtered features may reduce model complexity, and with little impact on performance.

Columnar islands in Barrett's esophagus: Do they impact Prague C&M criteria and dysplasia grade?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The standard for classifying Barrett's metaplasia on endoscopy, the Prague C&M criteria, ignores all islands of metaplastic-appearing tissue. The aims of the present study were to measure the prevalence of columnar islands, quantify their impact on metaplasia extent, and determine if they harbor advanced dysplasia. METHODS: Data from two prospective patient cohorts were retrospectively analyzed. They included adults who underwent upper endoscopy to evaluate for gastroesophageal reflux disease, Barrett's esophagus (BE), dysplasia, or adenocarcinoma between 2003 and 2012 at tertiary care centers in the USA and Germany. The BE pattern, location, and pathology were examined. The extent of BE as defined by the Prague criteria (disregarding the location of islands) was compared with the complete maximal extent of BE (incorporating the location of islands). RESULTS: A total of 555 patients underwent endoscopy (mean age 60.1 years, 67.2% male, 91.9% white). Among those patients, 191 (34.4%) showed metaplastic-appearing mucosa in islands. Endoscopically, in 101 (52.9%) cases, islands were proximal to the farthest segment of BE as defined by the Prague M location. Histologically, intestinal metaplasia was confirmed in 60 (58.8%) of the 102 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) where islands were biopsied. In 41 (40.2%) cases, the histologically confirmed BE islands extended farther than the maximal segment based on the Prague criteria. Pathology from biopsies of islands either changed the diagnosis or worsened the BE dysplasia grade in 16 (15.7%) of the 102 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Columnar islands are commonly seen on EGD. The Prague C&M criteria may underestimate the maximal extent of BE and overlook the area of highest dysplasia grade.

Faces of all clinically engaged staff: a quality improvement project that enhances the hospitalised patient experience.

BACKGROUND: Patients often cannot recognise the names and faces of providers involved in their hospital care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether photographs of a patient's providers (physicians and ancillary support staff) using the FACES (Faces of All Clinically Engaged Staff) instrument would increase recognition of the healthcare team, improve the perception of teamwork, and enhance patient satisfaction. METHODS: Cluster randomised controlled trial with patients admitted to four adult internal medicine services of an urban, tertiary care hospital. Patients randomly admitted to two services received the FACES instrument, while the remainder served as control. Study measurements included the proportion of patients able to recognise their care providers by photograph, name and role, as well as patient rating of communication among healthcare team members and their satisfaction with the hospital experience as assessed by a survey. RESULTS: A total of 197 of the 322 (61.2%) patients screened for participation proved eligible for the study. Key exclusion criteria included cognitive or visual impairment and non-fluency with English. Patients receiving the FACES instrument recognised more provider names, faces and roles than controls (all P<.001). The intervention group more strongly agreed with statements that healthcare providers communicated frequently and effectively with each other (68% vs 52%, P=.02), and worked well together (69% vs 53%, P=.02). When rating their satisfaction with the hospital experience, 50% of patients in the intervention group assigned the highest possible rating, compared with 36% of control (P=.06). LIMITATIONS: Nursing staff, although integral to healthcare teams, were not included in the FACES instrument due to privacy concerns. CONCLUSIONS: The FACES instrument improved patients' recognition of providers' names and roles, as well as patients' perception of inter-provider teamwork. There was a non-significant trend towards improved satisfaction.