University of Pennsylvania Telehealth Research Center of Excellence.

Drawing from insights from communication science and behavioral economics, the University of Pennsylvania Telehealth Research Center of Excellence (Penn TRACE) is designing and testing telehealth strategies with the potential to transform access to care, care quality, outcomes, health equity, and health-care efficiency across the cancer care continuum, with an emphasis on understanding mechanisms of action. Penn TRACE uses lung cancer care as an exemplar model for telehealth across the care continuum, from screening to treatment to survivorship. We bring together a diverse and interdisciplinary team of international experts and incorporate rapid-cycle approaches and mixed methods evaluation in all center projects. Our initiatives include a pragmatic sequential multiple assignment randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of telehealth strategies to increase shared decision-making for lung cancer screening and 2 pilot projects to test the effectiveness of telehealth to improve cancer care, identify multilevel mechanisms of action, and lay the foundation for future pragmatic trials. Penn TRACE aims to produce new fundamental knowledge and advance telehealth science in cancer care at Penn and nationally.

Behavioral Interventions to Improve Breast Cancer Screening Outreach: Two Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Despite public health efforts, breast cancer screening rates remain below national goals. Objective: To evaluate whether bulk ordering, text messaging, and clinician endorsement increase breast cancer screening rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two concurrent, pragmatic, randomized clinical trials, each with a 2-by-2 factorial design, were conducted between October 25, 2021, and April 25, 2022, in 2 primary care regions of an academic health system. The trials included women aged 40 to 74 years with at least 1 primary care visit in the past 2 years who were eligible for breast cancer screening. Interventions: Patients in trial A were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a signed bulk order for mammogram or no order; in a factorial design, patients were concurrently randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive or not receive text message reminders. Patients in trial B were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a message signed by their primary care clinician (clinician endorsement) or from the organization (standard messaging); in a factorial design, patients were concurrently randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive or not receive text message reminders. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who completed a screening mammogram within 3 months. Results: Among 24 632 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 60.4 (7.5) years. In trial A, at 3 months, 15.4% (95% CI, 14.6%-16.1%) of patients in the bulk order arm and 12.7% (95% CI, 12.1%-13.4%) in the no order arm completed a mammogram, showing a significant increase (absolute difference, 2.7%; 95% CI, 1.6%-3.6%; P < .001). In the text messaging comparison arms, 15.1% (95% CI, 14.3%-15.8%) of patients receiving a text message completed a mammogram compared with 13.0% (95% CI, 12.4%-13.7%) of those in the no text messaging arm, a significant increase (absolute difference of 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.0%-3.0%; P < .001). In trial B, at 3 months, 12.5% (95% CI, 11.3%-13.7%) of patients in the clinician endorsement arm completed a mammogram compared with 11.4% (95% CI, 10.3%-12.5%) of those in the standard messaging arm, which was not significant (absolute difference, 1.1%; 95% CI, -0.5% to 2.7%; P = .18). In the text messaging comparison arms, 13.2% (95% CI, 12.0%-14.4%) of patients receiving a text message completed a mammogram compared with 10.7% (95% CI, 9.7%-11.8%) of those in the no text messaging arm, a significant increase (absolute difference, 2.5%; 95% CI, 0.8%-4.0%; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings show that text messaging women after initial breast cancer screening outreach via either electronic portal or mailings, as well as bulk ordering with or without text messaging, can increase mammogram completion rates. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05089903.

Factors Informing High-Risk Primary Care Patient Choice around Telehealth Use: a Framework.

BACKGROUND: While telehealth's presence in post-pandemic primary care appears assured, its exact role remains unknown. Value-based care's expansion has heightened interest in telehealth's potential to improve uptake of preventive and chronic disease care, especially among high-risk primary care populations. Despite this, the pandemic underscored patients' diverse preferences around using telehealth. Understanding the factors underlying this population's preferences can inform future telehealth strategies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the factors informing high-risk primary care patient choice of whether to pursue primary care via telehealth, in-office or to defer care altogether. DESIGN: Qualitative, cross-sectional study utilizing semi-structured telephone interviews of a convenience sample of 29 primary care patients between July 13 and September 30, 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients at high risk of poor health outcomes and/or acute care utilization who were offered a follow-up primary care visit via audiovisual, audio-only or in-office modalities. APPROACH: Responses were analyzed via grounded theory, using a constant comparison method to refine emerging categories, distinguish codes, and synthesize evolving themes. KEY RESULTS: Of the 29 participants, 16 (55.2%) were female and 19 (65.5%) were Black; the mean age (SD) was 64.6 (11.1). Participants identified four themes influencing their choice of visit type: perceived utility (encapsulating clinical and non-clinical utility), underlying costs (in terms of time, money, effort, and safety), modifiers (e.g., participants' clinical situation, choice availability, decision phenotype), and drivers (inclusive of their background experiences and digital environment). The relationship of these themes is depicted in a novel framework of patient choice around telehealth use. CONCLUSIONS: While visit utility and cost considerations are foundational to participants' decisions around whether to pursue care via telehealth, underappreciated modifiers and drivers often magnify or mitigate these considerations. Policymakers, payers, and health systems can leverage these factors to anticipate and enhance equitable high-value telehealth use in primary care settings among high-risk individuals.

Insights Into Patients' Perceptions of Health-Related Social Needs and the Role of the Adult Primary Care Clinic.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: While it is well established that unmet healthrelated social needs (HRSN) adversely affect health outcomes, there has been limited evaluation in adult primary care of patients' perceptions of how these needs impact their health and the role of the primary care provider (PCP). The objective of this study is to identify patients' perceptions of HRSN and how PCPs could help address them. Secondary objectives include exploring the impact of goal setting and a 1-time cash transfer (CT). METHODS: This qualitative study used semi-structured baseline and follow-up interviews with patients in internal medicine clinics. Adult primary care patients were included if they screened positive as having 1 of 3 HRSN: financial resource strain, transportation needs, or food insecurity. All participants completed an initial interview about their HRSN and health, and were asked to set a 6-month health goal. At enrollment, participants were randomized to receive a $500 CT or a $50 participation reward. At 6-months, patients were interviewed again to investigate progress toward meeting their health goals, [when applicable] how the CT helped, and their beliefs about the role of PCPs in addressing HRSN. RESULTS: We completed 30 initial and 25 follow-up interviews. Participants identified their HRSN, however most did not readily connect identified needs to health. Although participants were receptive to HRSN screening, they did not feel it was their PCP's responsibility to address these needs. Verbal goal-setting appeared to be a useful tool, and while the CTs were appreciated, patients often found them inadequate to address HRSN. CONCLUSIONS: Given the importance of identifying the social conditions that shape patients' health, providers, and health systems have an opportunity to re-evaluate their role in helping patients address these barriers. Future studies could examine the effect of more frequent disbursement of CTs over time.

Effect of Nudges to Clinicians, Patients, or Both to Increase Statin Prescribing: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Statins reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, but less than one-half of individuals in America who meet guideline criteria for a statin are actively prescribed this medication. Objective: To evaluate whether nudges to clinicians, patients, or both increase initiation of statin prescribing during primary care visits. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial evaluated statin prescribing of 158 clinicians from 28 primary care practices including 4131 patients. The design included a 12-month preintervention period and a 6-month intervention period between October 19, 2019, and April 18, 2021. Interventions: The usual care group received no interventions. The clinician nudge combined an active choice prompt in the electronic health record during the patient visit and monthly feedback on prescribing patterns compared with peers. The patient nudge was an interactive text message delivered 4 days before the visit. The combined nudge included the clinician and patient nudges. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was initiation of a statin prescription during the visit. Results: The sample comprised 4131 patients with a mean (SD) age of 65.5 (10.5) years; 2120 (51.3%) were male; 1210 (29.3%) were Black, 106 (2.6%) were Hispanic, 2732 (66.1%) were White, and 83 (2.0%) were of other race or ethnicity, and 933 (22.6%) had atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. In unadjusted analyses during the preintervention period, statins were prescribed to 5.6% of patients (105 of 1876) in the usual care group, 4.8% (97 of 2022) in the patient nudge group, 6.0% (104 of 1723) in the clinician nudge group, and 4.7% (82 of 1752) in the combined group. During the intervention, statins were prescribed to 7.3% of patients (75 of 1032) in the usual care group, 8.5% (100 of 1181) in the patient nudge group, 13.0% (128 of 981) in the clinician nudge arm, and 15.5% (145 of 937) in the combined group. In the main adjusted analyses relative to usual care, the clinician nudge significantly increased statin prescribing alone (5.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.4 to 7.8 percentage points; P = .01) and when combined with the patient nudge (7.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 5.1 to 9.1 percentage points; P = .001). The patient nudge alone did not change statin prescribing relative to usual care (0.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.8 to 2.5 percentage points; P = .32). Conclusions and Relevance: Nudges to clinicians with and without a patient nudge significantly increased initiation of a statin prescription during primary care visits. The patient nudge alone was not effective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04307472.

Primary Care Appointment Completion Rates and Telemedicine Utilization Among Black and Non-Black Patients from 2019 to 2020.

Objective: To understand how differences in primary care appointment completion rates between Black and non-Black patients changed in 2020 within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and when telemedicine utilization peaked. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the electronic health record from January 1 to December 31, 2020, among all adults scheduled for a primary care appointment within a large academic medical center. We used mixed-effects logistic regression to estimate adjusted appointment completion rates for Black patients compared with those for non-Black patients in 2020 as compared with those in 2019 within four time periods: (1) prepandemic (January 1, 2020, to March 12, 2020), (2) shutdown (March 13, 2020, to June 3, 2020), (3) reopening (June 4, 2020, to September 30, 2020), and (4) second wave (October 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020). Results: Across 1,947,399 appointments, differences in appointment completion rates between Black and non-Black patients improved in all time periods: +1.4 percentage points prepandemic (95% confidence interval [CI]: +0.8 to +2.0), +11.7 percentage points during shutdown (95% CI: +11.0 to +12.3), +8.2 percentage points during reopening (95% CI: +7.8 to +8.7), and +7.1 percentage points during second wave (95% CI: +6.4 to +7.8) (all p-values <0.001). The types of conditions managed by primary care shifted during the shutdown period, but the remainder of 2020 mirrored those from 2019. Discussion: Racial differences in appointment completion rates narrowed significantly in 2020 even as the mix of disease conditions began to mirror patterns observed in 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: Telemedicine may be an important tool for improving access to primary care for Black patients. These findings should be key considerations as regulators and payors determine telemedicine's future.

Refining interprofessional, outpatient transitions of care services to reduce hospital readmissions.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Transitions of care between healthcare facilities are associated with increased risk of adverse events and hospital readmissions. Previous studies employing pharmacists in transitions of care showed reduced 30-day readmissions, however, many were without an active comparator. There is no standardized approach to pharmacist involvement in transitions of care services, making it difficult to ascertain where pharmacist expertise is most meaningful. This paper aims to compare the 30-day hospital readmissions between an interprofessional hospital discharge visit (iHDV) with physician and pharmacist involvement to a non-interprofessional HDV (PHDV) without pharmacist involvement. METHOD: This was a retrospective quality improvement initiative examining patients of two outpatient clinical practices within a large, academic medical centre. The primary analysis compared 30-day hospital readmission rates for patients with a scheduled PHDV or iHDV within 30-days of index hospital discharge date, regardless of attendance at the HDV. The secondary outcome compared 30-day hospital readmission rates for patients who completed a PHDV or iHDV. Primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated using bivariate analysis and multivariate analysis by stepwise logistic regression, for both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP). RESULTS: This study found significantly lower 30-day hospital readmissions for patients scheduled for a PHDV compared to an iHDV (16.7% vs 21.5%, P = .0230) in an unadjusted analysis, but no significant difference in adjusted analyses (P = .4856). Per-protocol analysis found no significant difference in 30-day hospital readmission rates between groups in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Visit completion rates were significantly different between groups, with approximately twice as many PHDV group patients completing visits as compared to the iHDV group (74.1% vs 61.5%, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates an interprofessional clinic visit employing a clinical pharmacist in the post-hospital discharge visit did not significantly reduce 30-day hospital readmission rates compared to a post-hospital discharge visit without pharmacist involvement.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Quality Indicators Are Similar Across HIV Care Delivery Models.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) quality indicators according to model of HIV care delivery. Comparing HIV quality indicators by HIV care model could help inform best practices because patients achieving higher levels of quality indicators may have a mortality benefit. METHODS: Using the Partners HIV Cohort, we categorized 1565 patients into 3 HIV care models: infectious disease provider only (ID), generalist only (generalist), or infectious disease provider and generalist (ID plus generalist). We examined 12 HIV quality indicators used by 5 major medical and quality associations and grouped them into 4 domains: process, screening, immunization, and HIV management. We used generalized estimating equations to account for most common provider and multivariable analyses adjusted for prespecified covariates to compare composite rates of HIV quality indicator completion. RESULTS: We found significant differences between HIV care models, with the ID plus generalists group achieving significantly higher quality measures than the ID group in HIV management (94.4% vs 91.7%, P = .03) and higher quality measures than generalists in immunization (87.8% vs 80.6%, P = .03) in multivariable adjusted analyses. All models achieved rates that equaled or surpassed previously reported quality indicator rates. The absolute differences between groups were small and ranged from 2% to 7%. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that multiple HIV care models are effective with respect to HIV quality metrics. Factors to consider when determining HIV care model include healthcare setting, feasibility, and physician and patient preference.

Non-Communicable Disease Preventive Screening by HIV Care Model.

IMPORTANCE: The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) epidemic has evolved, with an increasing non-communicable disease (NCD) burden emerging and need for long-term management, yet there are limited data to help delineate the optimal care model to screen for NCDs for this patient population. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to compare rates of NCD preventive screening in persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) by type of HIV care model, focusing on metabolic/cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer screening. We hypothesized that primary care models that included generalists would have higher preventive screening rates. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Partners HealthCare System (PHS) encompassing Brigham & Women's Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, and affiliated community health centers. PARTICIPANTS: PLWHA age >18 engaged in active primary care at PHS. EXPOSURE: HIV care model categorized as infectious disease (ID) providers only, generalist providers only, or ID plus generalist providers. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURES(S): Odds of screening for metabolic/CVD outcomes including hypertension (HTN), obesity, hyperlipidemia (HL), and diabetes (DM) and cancer including colorectal cancer (CRC), cervical cancer, and breast cancer. RESULTS: In a cohort of 1565 PLWHA, distribution by HIV care model was 875 ID (56%), 90 generalists (6%), and 600 ID plus generalists (38%). Patients in the generalist group had lower odds of viral suppression but similar CD4 counts and ART exposure as compared with ID and ID plus generalist groups. In analyses adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical covariates and clustering within provider, there were no significant differences in metabolic/CVD or cancer screening rates among the three HIV care models. CONCLUSIONS: There were no notable differences in metabolic/CVD or cancer screening rates by HIV care model after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. These findings suggest that HIV patients receive similar preventive health care for NCDs independent of HIV care model.

Pregnancy Desire, Partner Serodiscordance, and Partner HIV Disclosure among Reproductive Age HIV-Infected Women in an Urban Clinic.

Women comprise 25% of the US HIV epidemic, with many women of reproductive age. There is a need for providers to address the reproductive needs and desires of women with HIV given that effective antiretroviral therapy has transformed HIV into a chronic disease. This cross-sectional study shows high rates of partner serodiscordance (61%) and moderate HIV disclosure to partners (61%). Patients surveyed reported practitioners discuss condoms (94%) and contraception (71%) more often than pregnancy desire (38%). In our sample, 44% of the surveyed women intended future pregnancy, whereas women who did not intend future pregnancy cited HIV/health and serodiscordance as the most common reasons (56% and 35%, resp.). There was no difference in the knowledge of mother-to-child transmission risk between women who intended or did not intend future pregnancy (p = 0.71). These results underline the need for provider training in reproductive counseling to promote risk reduction and education.

Development of Obesity and Related Diseases in African Refugees After Resettlement to United States.

Despite increases in obesity and related diseases in developing nations, initial refugee clinical visits do not address these issues. We explored the development of obesity and related diseases in a longitudinal prospective cohort of African refugees resettling in northeastern US. Using state Department of Health data, refugees were linked to a health system. Body mass index, diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia status were extracted from charts. US regional controls from NAMCS/NHAMCS data were matched by age, sex, race, and visit year. African refugee BMI increased after resettlement at 1 (1.7 ± 2.9, p < 0.0001) and 5 years (3.1 ± 3.7, p < 0.0001), a different trend than matched regional controls (p = 0.01). Refugees had increased rates of diabetes (1.0 vs. 10.8 %, p < 0.0001), hypertension (16.7 vs. 21.6 %, p < 0.0001) and hyperlipidemia (3.9 vs. 10.8 %, p < 0.0001) at 5 years not observed in regional controls. Our findings emphasize the need for interventions during resettlement to prevent development of obesity and related disease in this vulnerable population.