Colocating Syringe Services, COVID-19 Vaccination, And Infectious Disease Testing: Baltimore's Experience.

People who inject drugs face many challenges that contribute to poor health outcomes, including drug overdose, HIV, and hepatitis C infections. These conditions require high-quality prevention and treatment services. Syringe services programs are evidence-based harm reduction programs, and they have established track records with people who inject drugs, earning them deep trust within this population. In Baltimore, Maryland, although many syringe support services were limited during the COVID-19 pandemic, the health department's syringe services programs remained operational, allowing for the continuation of harm reduction services, including naloxone distribution. This evaluation describes a collaborative effort to colocate infectious disease testing and COVID-19 vaccination with a syringe services program. Our evaluation demonstrated that colocation of important services with trusted community partners can facilitate engagement and is essential for service uptake. Maintaining adequate and consistent funding for these services is central to program success. Colocation of other services within syringe services programs, such as medications for opioid use disorder, wound care, and infectious disease treatment, would further expand health care access for people who inject drugs.

High Primary COVID-19 Vaccine Series Completion by People Who Inject Drugs When Colocating Services at a Syringe Services Van.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to describe the impact of colocating COVID-19 vaccinations with local syringe service programs on vaccine completion among people who inject drugs. METHODS: Data were derived from 6 community-based clinics. People who inject drugs who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine from a colocated clinic partnering with a local syringe service program were included in the study. Vaccine completion was abstracted from electronic medical records; additional vaccinations were abstracted using health information exchanges embedded within the electronic medical records. RESULTS: Overall, 142 individuals with a mean age of 51 years, predominantly male (72%) and Black, non-Hispanic (79%) received COVID-19 vaccines. More than half elected to receive a 2-dose mRNA vaccine (51.4%). Eighty-five percent completed a primary series, and 71% of those who received a mRNA vaccine completed the 2-dose series. Booster uptake was 34% in those completing a primary series. CONCLUSIONS: Colocated clinics are an effective means of reaching vulnerable populations. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues and need for annual booster vaccines arises, it is important to bolster public support and funding to continue low-barrier preventive clinics colocated with harm reduction services for this population.

Disproportionate impact of abortion restriction: Implications for emergency department clinicians.

Individuals experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) and/or human trafficking (HT) are at increased risk of severe health consequences as a result of legislation criminalizing and/or restricting abortion, which is expected to increase as a result of the Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson. These risks are further stratified by race, socioeconomics, and other marginalizing demographic attributes. IPV and HT introduce barriers to maintaining physical and mental health, due to control of access to transportation and funds by the abuser, fear of retribution for seeking healthcare, and other barriers. Individuals experiencing IPV or HT often lack reproductive autonomy, as a result of facing reproductive coercion at the hands of their abusers. Following the Dobbs decision, these vulnerable patient populations will face further limitations on their reproductive autonomy and increased obstacles to obtaining an abortion if they medically need or desire one. This will likely result in more patients presenting to the emergency department due to complications from unsafe or unsupervised self-managed abortions, as well as patients being reluctant to report having obtained an unlawful abortion due to fear of legal consequences. This is particularly relevant to individuals experiencing IPV and HT, as they may be more likely to use these methods for obtaining an abortion due to numerous barriers. Emergency medicine clinicians are vital in providing care to these patients, as they frequently present to emergency departments. A multi-pronged approach to better support these patients is essential, involving an increased index of suspicion for IPV, HT or the complications of unsupervised abortion, improved organizational structures, specialized training for staff, improved screening methods, reflection on implicit bias, and recommendations for mindful documentation and legal considerations.

A Path Forward: COVID-19 Vaccine Equity Community Education and Outreach Initiative.

COVID-19 vaccines offer hope to end the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, we document key lessons learned as we continue to confront COVID-19 variants and work to adapt our vaccine outreach strategies to best serve our community. In the fall of 2020, the Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity at Johns Hopkins Medicine, in collaboration with the Office of Government and Community Affairs for Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, established the COVID-19 Vaccine Equity Community Education and Outreach Initiative in partnership with faith and community leaders, local and state government representatives, and community-based organizations. Working with community and government partnerships established before COVID-19 enabled our team to quickly build infrastructure focused on COVID-19 vaccine education and equity. These partnerships resulted in the development and implementation of web-based educational content, major culturally adapted media campaigns (reaching more than 200,000 individuals), community and faith education outreach, youth-focused initiatives, and equity-focused mobile vaccine clinics. The community mobile vaccine clinics vaccinated over 3,000 people in the first 3 months. Of these, 90% identified as persons of color who have been disproportionately impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Academic-government-community partnerships are vital to ensure health equity. Community partnerships, education events, and open dialogues were conducted between the community and medical faculty. Using nontraditional multicultural media venues enabled us to reach many community members and facilitated informed decisionmaking. Additionally, an equitable COVID-19 vaccine policy requires attention to vaccine access as well as access to sound educational information. Our initiative has been thoughtful about using various types of vaccination sites, mobile vaccine units, and flexible hours of operation.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Communicable Disease Testing Services' Integration Within a Syringe Services Program: A Program Brief.

ABSTRACT: People who inject drugs often have a higher prevalence of risk factors associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and associated morbidity and mortality, compounded by challenges in health care access. This increased vulnerability underscores the critical need to prioritize people who inject drug in ongoing COVID-19 vaccination efforts. Co-location of syringe services, COVID-19 vaccination services, and other communicable disease testing has proved an effective model to provide necessary interventions without creating additional barriers. Here, we describe a partnership between the Baltimore City Health Department, Johns Hopkins Mobile Vaccine Unit, and the Center for Infectious Disease and Nursing Innovation at the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing to provide COVID-19 vaccination, HIV and sexually transmitted infection testing, wound care, and linkage to care services co-located with a long-running syringe services program. We describe the services offered by each partner and lessons learned from this community-based co-location of services initiative.

Correction to: Do Words Matter? Stigmatizing Language and the Transmission of Bias in the Medical Record.

In the HTML version of this paper, Ms. Goddu was incorrectly listed. The correct citation should be AP Goddu. Exposure to the stigmatizing language note was associated with more negative attitudes towards the patient (20.3 stigmatizing vs. 25.1 neutral, p < 0.001). Reading the stigmatizing language note was associated with less aggressive management of the patient's pain (4.7 stigmatizing vs. 5.3 neutral, p < 0.001).

Emergency Department Patient Perceptions of Transvaginal Ultrasound for Complications of First-Trimester Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) transvaginal ultrasound (US) is underused in clinical practice. This study assessed pregnant women's perceptions of ED transvaginal US in terms of pain, embarrassment, anxiety, and willingness to receive the procedure. Secondary variables include physicians' perceptions of patients' experiences. METHODS: Women undergoing US examinations for complications of first-trimester pregnancy were prospectively surveyed before any US and after ED and/or radiology transvaginal US. Patients' and physicians' assessments of pain, embarrassment, and anxiety were measured with visual analog scales (0-100). RESULTS: A total of 398 women were enrolled. In the pre-US survey, the median anxiety score was 14 (interquartile range, 3-51), and 96% of patients were willing to have an ED transvaginal US if necessary. Of those who had ED transvaginal US, 96% would agree to have another examination. Patients reported minimal pain/embarrassment, and there was no difference if performed in the ED versus radiology (median pain, 11.5 versus 13; P = .433; median embarrassment, 7 versus 4; P = .345). Of the 48 who had both ED and radiology transvaginal US, 85% thought the ED transvaginal US was worthwhile. Physicians accurately assessed patient's embarrassment and pain (mean differences, 3.5 and -1.9, respectively; P > .25 for both); however, they overestimated them relative to the pelvic examination (mean difference for embarrassment, 12.8; P < .0001; pain, 8.0; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant ED patients report low levels of anxiety, pain, and embarrassment, and after ED transvaginal US, 96% would agree to have the examination again. There is no difference in pain/embarrassment between ED and radiology transvaginal US. Emergency department physicians accurately assessed patients' pain and embarrassment with ED transvaginal US but overestimated them compared to the pelvic examination.

Do Words Matter? Stigmatizing Language and the Transmission of Bias in the Medical Record.

BACKGROUND: Clinician bias contributes to healthcare disparities, and the language used to describe a patient may reflect that bias. Although medical records are an integral method of communicating about patients, no studies have evaluated patient records as a means of transmitting bias from one clinician to another. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether stigmatizing language written in a patient medical record is associated with a subsequent physician-in-training's attitudes towards the patient and clinical decision-making. DESIGN: Randomized vignette study of two chart notes employing stigmatizing versus neutral language to describe the same hypothetical patient, a 28-year-old man with sickle cell disease. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 413 physicians-in-training: medical students and residents in internal and emergency medicine programs at an urban academic medical center (54% response rate). MAIN MEASURES: Attitudes towards the hypothetical patient using the previously validated Positive Attitudes towards Sickle Cell Patients Scale (range 7-35) and pain management decisions (residents only) using two multiple-choice questions (composite range 2-7 representing intensity of pain treatment). KEY RESULTS: Exposure to the stigmatizing language note was associated with more negative attitudes towards the patient (20.6 stigmatizing vs. 25.6 neutral, p < 0.001). Furthermore, reading the stigmatizing language note was associated with less aggressive management of the patient's pain (5.56 stigmatizing vs. 6.22 neutral, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Stigmatizing language used in medical records to describe patients can influence subsequent physicians-in-training in terms of their attitudes towards the patient and their medication prescribing behavior. This is an important and overlooked pathway by which bias can be propagated from one clinician to another. Attention to the language used in medical records may help to promote patient-centered care and to reduce healthcare disparities for stigmatized populations.

Confronting Ethical and Regulatory Challenges of Emergency Care Research With Conscious Patients.

Barriers to informed consent are ubiquitous in the conduct of emergency care research across a wide range of conditions and clinical contexts. They are largely unavoidable; can be related to time constraints, physical symptoms, emotional stress, and cognitive impairment; and affect patients and surrogates. US regulations permit an exception from informed consent for certain clinical trials in emergency settings, but these regulations have generally been used to facilitate trials in which patients are unconscious and no surrogate is available. Most emergency care research, however, involves conscious patients, and surrogates are often available. Unfortunately, there is neither clear regulatory guidance nor established ethical standards in regard to consent in these settings. In this report-the result of a workshop convened by the National Institutes of Health Office of Emergency Care Research and Department of Bioethics to address ethical challenges in emergency care research-we clarify potential gaps in ethical understanding and federal regulations about research in emergency care in which limited involvement of patients or surrogates in enrollment decisions is possible. We propose a spectrum of approaches directed toward realistic ethical goals and a research and policy agenda for addressing these issues to facilitate clinical research necessary to improve emergency care.

Safety of a rapid diagnostic protocol with accelerated stress testing.

BACKGROUND: Most patients at low to intermediate risk for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) receive a 12- to 24-hour "rule out." Recently, trials have found that a coronary computed tomographic angiography-based strategy is more efficient. If stress testing were performed within the same time frame as coronary computed tomographic angiography, the 2 strategies would be more similar. We tested the hypothesis that stress testing can safely be performed within several hours of presentation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting to a university hospital from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2011, with potential ACS. Patients placed in a clinical pathway that performed stress testing after 2 negative troponin values 2 hours apart were included. We excluded patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction or with an elevated initial troponin. The main outcome was safety of immediate stress testing defined as the absence of death or acute myocardial infarction (defined as elevated troponin within 24 hours after the test). RESULTS: A total of 856 patients who presented with potential ACS were enrolled in the clinical pathway and included in this study. Patients had a median age of 55.0 (interquartile range, 48-62) years. Chest pain was the chief concern in 86%, and pain was present on arrival in 73% of the patients. There were no complications observed during the stress test. There were 0 deaths (95% confidence interval, 0%-0.46%) and 4 acute myocardial infarctions within 24 hours (0.5%; 95% confidence interval, 0.14%-1.27%). The peak troponins were small (0.06, 0.07, 0.07, and 0.19 ng/mL). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who present to the ED with potential ACS can safely undergo a rapid diagnostic protocol with stress testing.

Myeloperoxidase and C-reactive protein in patients with cocaine-associated chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Myeloperoxidase (MPO) and C-reactive protein (CRP) are markers of inflammation and elevated levels have been found in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) unrelated to cocaine. We evaluated the utility of MPO and CRP for diagnosis of ACS and the prediction of 30-day adverse cardiovascular events in patients with cocaine-related chest pain. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis from a prospective cohort study of ED patients who received evaluation for ACS. Structured data collection at presentation included demographics, chest pain history, laboratory results, and electrocardiographic data. Our primary outcome was diagnosis of ACS at index visit and 30-day adverse events. As a secondary analysis, we provide data on a matched cohort without cocaine use. RESULTS: Baseline data and CRP were available for 95 cocaine users; 82 had MPO data also. Patients had a mean age of 46.6 (SD 8.1) years, 90% were black, and 62% were male. Acute coronary syndrome occurred in 7% of cocaine users. With respect to diagnosis of ACS, the area under the curve was poor for both MPO (0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.91) and CRP (0.63; 95% CI: 0.39-0.88). Similar results were found for 30-day events. With respect to prognosis of 30-day adverse cardiovascular events, the area under the curve was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.45-0.91) for MPO and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.45-0.90) for CRP. Similar results were found for 30-day events. In the matched cohort of patients who were not cocaine users, performance of MPO (n = 66) and CRP (n = 86) was also poor. CONCLUSIONS: Myeloperoxidase and CRP are not useful for diagnosis or prognosis of patients with cocaine-associated chest pain.