Effectiveness and Clinical Usefulness of Electronic Agenda-setting in Psychiatric Practices: A South Texas Psychiatric PBRN Study.

There is a general consensus that the doctor-patient interview should be as productive and efficient as possible. This is becoming increasingly difficult in a health care insurance system that demands shorter appointment times. Clinicians must therefore find ways to condense the clinical encounter without sacrificing quality. The purposes of this study were: (1) to facilitate shared decision-making between psychiatrist and patient via pre-visit patient agenda-setting, (2) to evaluate the effectiveness and ease of use of the agenda-setting tool, and (3) to determine patient and clinician satisfaction with the clinical encounter. Patients completed questionnaires to assist in agenda-setting via an electronic tablet while in the waiting area before seeing the psychiatrist. Both patients and psychiatrists then completed post-visit questionnaires to assess their satisfaction with the encounter. We measured patient satisfaction and the extent to which the psychiatrist addressed concerns before and after the visit, as well as ease of use for the patient, psychiatrist satisfaction, and clinical helpfulness to the treating psychiatrist. Additional analyses also indicated that there was a significant increase in patient satisfaction scores, compared with an average of all previous visits, and a significant increase in the number of concerns addressed during the current visit when compared with the average number of previous concerns addressed. Patients reported little difficulty using the tablet. Similarly, psychiatrists reported that the device was helpful in the clinical setting and they expressed high levels of satisfaction with the visit. We hope our work will encourage others to use this agenda-setting tool in their practices to facilitate better patient care.

Comfort With Uncertainty in Medical Students and Their Residency Choice: A Residency Research Network of Texas Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Little is known about how comfort with uncertainty (CwU) influences career choice in medical students. The authors of this study examined the correlation between CwU and primary care career choice. METHODS: In academic years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, the authors distributed surveys to third-year medical students from eight US medical schools, seven in Texas. The survey tool included two CwU scales and one comfort with ambiguity scale. Other questions covered career plans, family and personal background, and student debt. In the subjects' fourth year of medical school, authors obtained match data from the medical schools and the authors further communicated with the students where indicated. The primary outcome was the composite score of the three scales correlated to career choice, with a focus on primary care and family medicine. RESULTS: Among 642 participants, there was no difference in CwU scores between students who matched into primary care versus specialty fields (3.39 vs 3.37 average of three scales, P=.65, each individual scale NS) or family medicine (FM) vs all other fields (3.39 vs 3.37 average of three scales, P=.81). Other bivariate predictors of FM choice were more similar than different to previous studies, such as osteopathic more likely than allopathic, lower family income, planning to care for underserved populations, and had a primary care role model. Logistic regression found the two biggest predictors of FM were osteopathic training and the importance of educating patients about health promotion and disease prevention. CONCLUSIONS: We found no correlation between CwU and medical student career choice for primary care or FM. We discuss confounding factors that may impact results, as well as recommendations for medication education and public policy.

Incidence of and Trends in the Leading Cancers With Elevated Incidence Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations, 2012-2016.

Cancer incidence varies among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations, as well as between AI/AN and White populations. This study examined trends for cancers with elevated incidence among AI/AN compared with non-Hispanic White populations and estimated potentially avoidable incident cases among AI/AN populations. Incident cases diagnosed during 2012-2016 were identified from population-based cancer registries and linked with the Indian Health Service patient registration databases to improve racial classification of AI/AN populations. Age-adjusted rates (per 100,000) and trends were calculated for cancers with elevated incidence among AI/AN compared with non-Hispanic White populations (rate ratio of >1.0) according to region. Trends were estimated using joinpoint regression analyses. Expected cancers were estimated by applying age-specific cancer incidence rates among non-Hispanic White populations to population estimates for AI/AN populations. Excess cancer cases among AI/AN populations were defined as observed minus expected cases. Liver, stomach, kidney, lung, colorectal, and female breast cancers had higher incidence rates among AI/AN populations across most regions. Between 2012 and 2016, nearly 5,200 excess cancers were diagnosed among AI/AN populations, with the largest number of excess cancers (1,925) occurring in the Southern Plains region. Culturally informed efforts could reduce cancer disparities associated with these and other cancers among AI/AN populations.