Building Tailored Resource Guides to Address Social Risks and Advance Health Equity in the Veterans Health Administration.

Background: Health care organizations, including the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), are increasingly adopting programs to address social determinants of health. As part of a comprehensive social risk screening and referral model, tailored resource guides can support efforts to address unmet social needs. However, limited guidance is available on best practices for the development of resource guides in health care settings. Observations: This article describes the development of geographically tailored resource guides for a national VHA quality improvement initiative, Assessing Circumstances and Offering Resources for Needs (ACORN), which aims to systematically screen for and address social needs among veterans. We outline the rationale for using resource guides as a social needs intervention and provide a pragmatic framework for resource guide development and maintenance. We offer guidance based on lessons learned from the development of ACORN resource guides, emphasizing a collaborative approach with VHA social workers and other frontline clinical staff, as well as with community-based organizations. Our how-to guide provides steps for identifying high-yield resources along with formatting considerations to maximize accessibility and usability among patients. Conclusions: Resource guides can serve as a valuable cross-cutting component of health care organizations' efforts to address social needs. We provide a practical approach to resource guide development that may support successful implementation within the VHA and other clinical settings.

Industry Payments to US Physicians by Specialty and Product Type.

This study examines the distribution of payments within and across specialties and the medical products associated with the largest total payments.

Cultural diversity of traditions for the disposal of exfoliated teeth: Implications for researchers.

OBJECTIVES: For decades, researchers in anthropology and archaeology have used teeth, including exfoliated primary teeth, as fossil records of people's physical life experiences. Recently, researchers in psychiatry, epidemiology, environmental health and other fields have recognized the potential for teeth to serve as biomarkers of other early-life experiences, including trauma exposure and other types of psychosocial stress, which are potent determinants of later mental and physical health problems. Despite the emerging appreciation and value of teeth as biospecimens, little is understood about cultural beliefs and practices surrounding exfoliated teeth. If known, such insights could inform culturally appropriate practices for paediatric dental care and improve protocols for the ethical acquisition of teeth as biospecimens in research studies. To address this gap, a qualitative systematic review was performed to summarize the variety of traditions performed worldwide for disposing of primary exfoliated teeth. METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar, AnthroSource, Anthropological Literature, EHRAF World Cultures and Anthropology Plus were searched with a systematic search strategy to identify articles published from inception through December 2, 2021. Citations of relevant papers were also forward and backward searched. RESULTS: There were 3289 articles that met the initial inclusion criteria, of which 37 were included after individual screening and applying exclusion criteria. Thematic analysis was used to identify 74 distinct traditions related to the disposal of exfoliated teeth, which were organized into seven general themes: (1) giving teeth to a tooth fairy, (2) giving teeth to mouse figures, (3) throwing teeth, (4) hiding/keeping teeth, (5) burying teeth, (6) giving teeth to animals and (7) eating the tooth. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study elucidate the diversity within-yet universality of-exfoliated tooth disposal traditions and underscore the importance of tooth exfoliation as a major milestone during child development. Special attention must be paid to these traditions and related ethical concerns when designing research protocols related to their collection. With a greater understanding of beliefs and practices related to exfoliated teeth, researchers will be better equipped to engage children and families in studies that include analyses of exfoliated teeth, collect teeth as biospecimens, and broaden the use of teeth in research.

Doctors' duty to provide abortion information.

With abortion remaining legal in over half of the country and a proliferation of websites offering information on how to access abortion medications, for those who know where to look, there are sound options for safely ending an unwanted early-stage pregnancy. But not all patients have equal access to reliable information. This Article addresses the urgent downstream harms caused by the lack of access to abortion information, and argues that in view of these consequences, regardless of abortion's legal status, clinicians have a duty to provide their patients with abortion information. We begin by documenting clinicians' hesitation to share abortion information, drawing on our interviews with 25 doctors practicing medicine in a state where abortion is criminalized. Next, we explain why clinicians are duty-bound to provide all-options counseling. We then consider whether such duties shift where abortion is criminalized. After identifying the limited legal risks associated with supplying abortion information, and showing how, by requiring all-options counseling, professional societies might reduce risks to patients and clinicians, we conclude that, regardless of the legal status of abortion, clinicians have a professional responsibility to share basic abortion information - including treatment options and how to access those options.

Implementing a Social Needs Screening and Referral Program Among Veterans: Assessing Circumstances & Offering Resources for Needs (ACORN).

BACKGROUND: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system routinely screens Veterans for food insecurity, housing instability, and intimate partner violence, but does not systematically screen for other health-related social needs (HRSNs). OBJECTIVES: To (1) develop a process for systematically identifying and addressing Veterans' HRSNs, (2) determine reported prevalence of HRSNs, and (3) assess the acceptability of HRSN screening among Veterans. DESIGN: "Assessing Circumstances and Offering Resources for Needs" (ACORN) is a Veteran-tailored HRSN screening and referral quality improvement initiative. Veterans were screened via electronic tablet for nine HRSNs (food, housing, utilities, transportation, legal needs, social isolation, interpersonal violence, employment, and education) and provided geographically tailored resource guides for identified needs. Two-week follow-up interviews with a purposive sample of Veterans explored screening experiences. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of Veterans presenting for primary care at a VA urban women's health clinic and suburban community-based outpatient clinic (October 2019-May 2020). MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes included prevalence of HRSNs, Veteran-reported acceptability of screening, and use of resources guides. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and rapid qualitative analysis. KEY RESULTS: Of 268 Veterans screened, 50% reported one or more HRSNs. Social isolation was endorsed most frequently (29%), followed by educational needs (19%), interpersonal violence (12%), housing instability (9%), and utility concerns (7%). One in five Veterans reported at least one form of material hardship. In follow-up interviews (n = 15), Veterans found screening acceptable and felt VA should continue screening. No Veterans interviewed had contacted recommended resources at two-week follow-up, although several planned to use resource guides in the future. CONCLUSION: In a VA HRSN screening and referral program, Veterans frequently reported HRSNs, felt screening was important, and thought VA should continue to screen for these needs. Screening for HRSNs is a critical step towards connecting patients with services, identifying gaps in service delivery, and informing future resource allocation.

Ethical Considerations in Precision Medicine and Genetic Testing in Internal Medicine Practice: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians.

This American College of Physicians position paper aims to inform ethical decision making for the integration of precision medicine and genetic testing into clinical care. Although the positions are primarily intended for practicing physicians, they may apply to other health care professionals and can also inform how health care systems, professional schools, and residency programs integrate genomics into educational and clinical settings. Addressing the challenges of precision medicine and genetic testing will guide ethical and responsible implementation to improve health outcomes.

Effect of Pharmacogenomic Testing for Drug-Gene Interactions on Medication Selection and Remission of Symptoms in Major Depressive Disorder: The PRIME Care Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Selecting effective antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is an imprecise practice, with remission rates of about 30% at the initial treatment. Objective: To determine whether pharmacogenomic testing affects antidepressant medication selection and whether such testing leads to better clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that compared treatment guided by pharmacogenomic testing vs usual care. Participants included 676 clinicians and 1944 patients. Participants were enrolled from 22 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers from July 2017 through February 2021, with follow-up ending November 2021. Eligible patients were those with MDD who were initiating or switching treatment with a single antidepressant. Exclusion criteria included an active substance use disorder, mania, psychosis, or concurrent treatment with a specified list of medications. Interventions: Results from a commercial pharmacogenomic test were given to clinicians in the pharmacogenomic-guided group (n = 966). The comparison group received usual care and access to pharmacogenomic results after 24 weeks (n = 978). Main Outcomes and Measures: The co-primary outcomes were the proportion of prescriptions with a predicted drug-gene interaction written in the 30 days after randomization and remission of depressive symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) (remission was defined as PHQ-9 ≤ 5). Remission was analyzed as a repeated measure across 24 weeks by blinded raters. Results: Among 1944 patients who were randomized (mean age, 48 years; 491 women [25%]), 1541 (79%) completed the 24-week assessment. The estimated risks for receiving an antidepressant with none, moderate, and substantial drug-gene interactions for the pharmacogenomic-guided group were 59.3%, 30.0%, and 10.7% compared with 25.7%, 54.6%, and 19.7% in the usual care group. The pharmacogenomic-guided group was more likely to receive a medication with a lower potential drug-gene interaction for no drug-gene vs moderate/substantial interaction (odds ratio [OR], 4.32 [95% CI, 3.47 to 5.39]; P < .001) and no/moderate vs substantial interaction (OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.52 to 2.84]; P = .005) (P < .001 for overall comparison). Remission rates over 24 weeks were higher among patients whose care was guided by pharmacogenomic testing than those in usual care (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.57]; P = .02; risk difference, 2.8% [95% CI, 0.6% to 5.1%]) but were not significantly higher at week 24 when 130 patients in the pharmacogenomic-guided group and 126 patients in the usual care group were in remission (estimated risk difference, 1.5% [95% CI, -2.4% to 5.3%]; P = .45). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with MDD, provision of pharmacogenomic testing for drug-gene interactions reduced prescription of medications with predicted drug-gene interactions compared with usual care. Provision of test results had small nonpersistent effects on symptom remission. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03170362.

On All Accounts: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Limited Preoperative Optimization Efforts Before Colon Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Reports suggest that preoperative optimization of a patient's serious comorbidities is associated with a reduction in postoperative complications. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the cost and benefits of preoperative optimization, accounting for total costs associated with postoperative morbidity. DESIGN: This study is a decision tree cost-effectiveness analysis with probabilistic sensitivity analysis (10,000 iterations). SETTING: This is a hypothetical scenario of stage II colon cancer surgery. PATIENT: The simulated 65-year-old patient has left-sided, stage II colon cancer. INTERVENTION: Focused preoperative optimization targets high-risk comorbidities. OUTCOMES: Total discounted (3%) economic costs (US $2018), effectiveness (quality-adjusted life-years), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, cost/quality-adjusted life-years gained), and net monetary benefit. RESULTS: We calculated the per individual expected health care sector total cost of preoperative optimization and sequelae to be $12,395 versus $15,638 in those not optimized (net monetary benefit: $1.04 million versus $1.05 million). A nonoptimized patient attained an average 0.02 quality-adjusted life-years less than one optimized. Thus, preoperative optimization was the dominant strategy (lower total costs; higher quality-adjusted life-years). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated 100% of simulations favoring preoperative optimization. The breakeven cost of optimization to remain cost-effective was $6421 per patient. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability must account for the lack of standardization among existing preoperative optimization efforts, and decision analysis methodology provides guidance for the average patient or general population, and is not patient-specific. CONCLUSIONS: Although currently not comprehensively reimbursed, focused preoperative optimization may reduce total costs of care while also reducing complications from colon cancer surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B494. EN TODO CASO ANLISIS DE RENTABILIDAD DE LOS ESFUERZOS LIMITADOS DE OPTIMIZACIN PREOPERATORIA ANTES DE LA CIRUGA DE CNCER DE COLON: ANTECEDENTES:Los informes sugieren que la optimización preoperatoria de las comorbilidades graves de un paciente se asocia con una reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias.OBJETIVO:El propósito de este estudio fue evaluar el costo y los beneficios de la optimización preoperatoria, teniendo en cuenta los costos totales asociados con la morbilidad postoperatoria.DISEÑO:Análisis de costo-efectividad de árbol de decisión con análisis de sensibilidad probabilístico (10,000 iteraciones).AJUSTE ENTORNO CLINICO:Escenario hipotético Cirugía de cáncer de colon en estadio II.PACIENTE:Paciente simulado de 65 años con cáncer de colon en estadio II del lado izquierdo.INTERVENCIÓN:Optimización preoperatoria enfocada dirigida a comorbilidades de alto riesgo.RESULTADOS:Costos económicos totales descontados (3%) (US $ 2018), efectividad (años de vida ajustados por calidad [AVAC]), relación costo-efectividad incremental (ICER, costo / AVAC ganado) y beneficio monetario neto (NMB).RESULTADOS:Calculamos que el costo total esperado por sector de atención médica individual de la optimización preoperatoria y las secuelas es de $ 12,395 versus $ 15,638 en aquellos no optimizados (NMB: $ 1.04 millones versus $ 1.05 millones, respectivamente). Un paciente no optimizado alcanzó un promedio de 0.02 AVAC menos que uno optimizado. Por lo tanto, la optimización preoperatoria fue la estrategia dominante (menores costos totales; mayores AVAC). El análisis de sensibilidad probabilístico demostró que el 100% de las simulaciones favorecían la optimización preoperatoria. El costo de equilibrio de la optimización para seguir siendo rentable fue de $ 6,421 por paciente.LIMITACIONES:La generalización debe tener en cuenta la falta de estandarización entre los esfuerzos de optimización preoperatorios existentes y esa metodología de análisis de decisiones proporciona una guía para el paciente promedio o la población general, no específica del paciente.CONCLUSIONES:Si bien actualmente no se reembolsa de manera integral, la optimización preoperatoria enfocada puede reducir los costos totales de la atención y al mismo tiempo reducir las complicaciones de la cirugía de cáncer de colon. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B494.

A Culture Change in Geriatric Traumatology: Holistic and Patient-Tailored Care for Frail Patients with Fractures.

ABSTRACT: Medical decision-making for frail geriatric trauma patients is complex, especially toward the end of life. The goal of this paper is to review aspects of end-of-life decision-making, such as frailty, cognitive impairment, quality of life, goals of care, and palliative care. Additionally, we make recommendations for composing a patient-tailored treatment plan. In doing so, we seek to initiate the much-needed discussion regarding end-of-life care for frail geriatric patients.

Study design and implementation of the PRecision Medicine In MEntal health Care (PRIME Care) Trial.

Genomic testing has the potential to improve patient outcomes and reduce patient care costs by personalizing medication selection. Commercial pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for psychotropic and other medications is widely available and promoted as a means to implement "precision medicine." Despite evidence that genetic variation affects the metabolism of psychotropic medications, the clinical utility of these test results has not been established. Moreover, implementing such testing in routine clinical care is complex, requiring informatics support and a systematic approach to patient and provider education. The PRIME Care program is designed to bridge this gap, applying both clinical trials and implementation science methods to conduct a program of research. It is centered on a large, pragmatic randomized clinical trial (RCT) in which 2000 Veterans with a major depressive disorder (MDD) and their health care providers are randomized together to receive PGx test results at the beginning of an episode of care or 6 months later. We hypothesize that providers who receive the PGx test results will prescribe an antidepressant guided by the PGx findings and Veterans whose care is guided by PGx testing will experience higher rates of remission from MDD. If the results of the trial replicate those of prior PGx studies, which provided preliminary evidence of the utility of PGx guided prescribing, it would strongly support using a precision medicine approach to treat MDD. This program of research is also evaluating dissemination influencers, other biomarkers (e.g., genetic variation associated with depression response), and the health care cost implications of PGx testing. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03170362.

Implementing Goals-of-Care Conversations: Lessons From High- and Low-Performing Sites From a VA National Initiative.

CONTEXT: The Veterans Health Administration (VA) National Center for Ethics in Healthcare implemented the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative, including policy and practice standards, clinician communication training, a documentation template, and central implementation support to foster advance care planning via goals-of-care conversations for seriously ill veterans in 2014, spreading nationally to other Veterans Health Affairs (VA) sites in 2017. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to describe the range of early implementation experiences among the pilot sites, and compare them with spread sites that implemented LSTDI about two years later, identifying cross-site best practices and pitfalls. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 32 key stakeholders from 12 sites to identify cross-site best practices and pitfalls related to implementation. RESULTS: Three primary implementation themes emerged: organizational readiness for transformation, importance of champions, and time and resources needed to achieve implementation. Each theme's barriers and facilitators highlighted variability in success based on complexity in terms of vertical hierarchy and horizontal cross-role/cross-clinic relationships. CONCLUSION: Learning health care systems need multilevel interdisciplinary implementation approaches to support communication about serious illness, from broad-based system-level training and education to build communication skills, to focusing on characteristics of successful individual champions who listen to critics and are tenacious in addressing concerns.

Patients' and Care Partners' Perspectives on Dignity and Respect During Acute Care Hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Delivering patient-centered care (PCC) is essential to our healthcare system. Patient dignity and respect are foundational elements of PCC. Understanding patients' and their care partner's perspectives on the meaning of dignity and respect within a clinical care environment is critical to achieving our goal of PCC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to understand how patients and their care partners define, describe, and experience dignity and respect during hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with 22 patients and care partners hospitalized in high-acuity patient care areas in 1 academic medical center. Data collected from semistructured interviews were analyzed using grounded theory open coding in Atlas Ti software. RESULTS: Our data provide a definition of dignity and respect during hospitalization from the patient and care partner perspective and a conceptual model of the factors needed to enhance patients' and care partners' experience of dignity and respect in the hospital setting. Dignity was felt to be intrinsic to personhood including the recognition of that person's value by others. Respect was characterized as the behavioral or social norms that acknowledge dignity. Determinants of dignity and respect were categorized at the organizational (macro) level and within the microsystem between clinicians, patients, and their care partners. CONCLUSIONS: The definition of dignity and respect and the conceptual model presented here represent an important supplement to our understanding of dignity and respect during hospitalization. Healthcare organizations should focus on the key factors found in this study to create a culture that treats patients with dignity and respect.

Pilot of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative Among Veterans With Serious Illness.

BACKGROUND: Prior to national spread, the Department of Veterans Affairs implemented a pilot of the life-sustaining treatment decisions initiative (LSTDI) to promote proactive goals of care conversations (GoCC) with seriously ill patients, including policy and practice standards, an electronic documentation template and order set, and implementation support. AIM: To describe a 2-year pilot of the LSTDI at 4 demonstration sites. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 6664 patients who had at least one GoCC. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics characterized patient demographics, goals of care, LST decisions, and risk of hospitalization or mortality among patients with at least one GoCC. Participants were on average 71.4 years old, 93.2% male, 87.1% white, and 64.7% urban; 27.3% died by the end of the pilot period. Fifteen percent lacked decision-making capacity (DMC). Nonmutually exclusive goals included to be cured (7.6%), to prolong life (34%), to improve/maintain quality of life (61.5%), to be comfortable (53%), to obtain support for family/caregiver (8.4%), to achieve life goals (2.1%), and other (10.5%). Many GoCCs resulted in a do not resuscitate (DNR) order (58.8%). Patients without DMC were more likely to have comfort-oriented goals (77.3% vs 48.8%) and a DNR (84% vs 52.6%). Chart abstraction supported content validity of GoCC documentation. CONCLUSION: The pilot demonstrated that standardizing practices for eliciting and documenting GoCCs resulted in customized documentation of goals of care and LST decisions of a large number of seriously ill patients and established the feasibility of spreading standardized practices throughout a large integrated health care system.

Pediatric Trainees' Speaking Up About Unprofessional Behavior and Traditional Patient Safety Threats.

OBJECTIVE: Speaking up is increasingly recognized as essential for patient safety. We aimed to determine pediatric trainees' experiences, attitudes, and anticipated behaviors with speaking up about safety threats including unprofessional behavior. METHODS: Anonymous, cross-sectional survey of 512 pediatric trainees at 2 large US academic children's hospitals that queried experiences, attitudes, barriers and facilitators, and vignette responses for unprofessional behavior and traditional safety threats. RESULTS: Responding trainees (223 of 512, 44%) more commonly observed unprofessional behavior than traditional safety threats (57%, 127 of 223 vs 34%, 75 of 223; P < .001), but reported speaking up about unprofessional behavior less commonly (48%, 27 of 56 vs 79%, 44 of 56; P < .001). Respondents reported feeling less safe speaking up about unprofessional behavior than patient safety concerns (52%, 117 of 223 vs 78%, 173 of 223; P < .001). Respondents were significantly less likely to speaking up to, and use assertive language with, an attending physician in the unprofessional behavior vignette than the traditional safety vignette (10%, 22 of 223 vs 64%, 143 of 223, P < .001 and 12%, 27 of 223 vs 57%, 128 of 223, P < .001, respectively); these differences persisted even among respondents that perceived high potential for patient harm in both vignettes (20%, 16 of 81 vs 69%, 56 of 81, P < .001 and 20%, 16 of 81 vs 69%, 56 of 81, P < .001, respectively). Fear of conflict was the predominant barrier to speaking up about unprofessional behavior and more commonly endorsed for unprofessional behavior than traditional safety threats (67%, 150 of 223 vs 45%, 100 of 223, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest pediatric trainee reluctance to speak up when presented with unprofessional behavior compared to traditional safety threats and highlight a need to improve elements of the clinical learning environment to support speaking up.

Development and Validation of WeCares, a Survey Instrument to Assess Hospitalized Patients' and Family Members' "Willingness to Engage in Your Care and Safety".

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement is recognized as a method to improve care quality and safety. A research team developed WeCares (Willingness to Engage in Your Care and Safety), a survey instrument assessing patients' and families' engagement in the safety of their care during their hospital stay. The objective of this study is to establish the preliminary construct validity and internal consistency of WeCares. METHODS: WeCares was distributed to patients and families. With the survey responses, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to identify the factorial structure of WeCares. The internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Descriptive and comparative analysis was also performed to summarize patients' and families' responses. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients and families responded to the WeCare survey, of which 224 were used for EFA. EFA resulted in a 13-item, four-factor structure, including (1) comfortable sharing concerns, (2) responsibility for preventing errors, (3) perception of care team members' attitude, and (4) patients'/families' role in preventing errors. The Cronbach alphas were 0.716-0.866, indicating acceptable internal consistency. Overall, patients and families were comfortable sharing concerns with clinicians but preferred to remain anonymous. They believed that the care team members hold most responsibility for error prevention, however, and agreed on their ability to help prevent errors. CONCLUSION: WeCares was developed to assess patients' and families' willingness to engage. WeCares can also be used to facilitate conversation about safety concerns and shared responsibility. The study team believes this would lead to patient activation in guarding their own care and ultimately improve patient outcomes and safety.