Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 282
Filter
1.
J Am Board Fam Med ; 37(2): 261-269, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38740488

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is effective at reducing HIV transmission. However, PrEP uptake is low for racial and ethnic minorities and women, especially in the Southern US Health care clinicians should be prepared to identify all patients eligible for PrEP, provide counseling, and prescribe PrEP. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of persons newly diagnosed with HIV was conducted at a large public health system from January 2015 to June 2021. Interactions with the health system in the 5 years preceding HIV diagnosis were analyzed, and missed opportunities for HIV prevention interventions, including PrEP and condom use counseling, were identified. RESULTS: We identified 454 patients with a new HIV diagnosis with previous health system interactions. 166(36.6%) had at least 1 identifiable indication for PrEP: 42(9.3%) bacterial STI, 63(13.9%) inconsistent condom use, or 82(18%) injection drug use before HIV diagnosis. Only 7(1.5%) of patients were counseled on PrEP. Most patients (308; 67.8%) had no documented condom use history in the EHR before diagnosis, a surrogate marker for obtaining a sexual history. Patients who exclusively interacted with the emergency care setting did not receive PrEP education and were less likely to receive condom use counseling. CONCLUSION: Missed opportunities to offer HIV prevention before diagnosis were common among patients newly diagnosed with HIV. Most patients did not have sexual history documented in the chart before their HIV diagnosis. Educational interventions are needed to ensure that clinicians are prepared to identify those eligible and discuss the benefits of PrEP.


Subject(s)
HIV Infections , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Humans , HIV Infections/prevention & control , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Female , Retrospective Studies , Male , Adult , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Counseling/statistics & numerical data , Condoms/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult , Anti-HIV Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-HIV Agents/administration & dosage
2.
JAMA ; 331(16): 1387-1396, 2024 04 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38536161

ABSTRACT

Importance: Medicare's Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program will provide a health equity adjustment (HEA) to hospitals that have greater proportions of patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and that offer high-quality care beginning in fiscal year 2026. However, which hospitals will benefit most from this policy change and to what extent are unknown. Objective: To estimate potential changes in hospital performance after HEA and examine hospital patient mix, structural, and geographic characteristics associated with receipt of increased payments. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed all 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021. Publicly available data on program performance and hospital characteristics were linked to Medicare claims data on all inpatient stays for dual-eligible beneficiaries at each hospital to calculate HEA points and HVBP payment adjustments. Exposures: Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program HEA. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reclassification of HVBP bonus or penalty status and changes in payment adjustments across hospital characteristics. Results: Of 2676 hospitals participating in the HVBP program in fiscal year 2021, 1470 (54.9%) received bonuses and 1206 (45.1%) received penalties. After HEA, 102 hospitals (6.9%) were reclassified from bonus to penalty status, whereas 119 (9.9%) were reclassified from penalty to bonus status. At the hospital level, mean (SD) HVBP payment adjustments decreased by $4534 ($90 033) after HEA, ranging from a maximum reduction of $1 014 276 to a maximum increase of $1 523 765. At the aggregate level, net-positive changes in payment adjustments were largest among safety net hospitals ($28 971 708) and those caring for a higher proportion of Black patients ($15 468 445). The likelihood of experiencing increases in payment adjustments was significantly higher among safety net compared with non-safety net hospitals (574 of 683 [84.0%] vs 709 of 1993 [35.6%]; adjusted rate ratio [ARR], 2.04 [95% CI, 1.89-2.20]) and high-proportion Black hospitals compared with non-high-proportion Black hospitals (396 of 523 [75.7%] vs 887 of 2153 [41.2%]; ARR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.29-1.51]). Rural hospitals (374 of 612 [61.1%] vs 909 of 2064 [44.0%]; ARR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30-1.58]), as well as those located in the South (598 of 1040 [57.5%] vs 192 of 439 [43.7%]; ARR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.10-1.42]) and in Medicaid expansion states (801 of 1651 [48.5%] vs 482 of 1025 [47.0%]; ARR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.06-1.28]), were also more likely to experience increased payment adjustments after HEA compared with their urban, Northeastern, and Medicaid nonexpansion state counterparts, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicare's implementation of HEA in the HVBP program will significantly reclassify hospital performance and redistribute program payments, with safety net and high-proportion Black hospitals benefiting most from this policy change. These findings suggest that HEA is an important strategy to ensure that value-based payment programs are more equitable.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Economics, Hospital , Health Equity , Medicare , Value-Based Purchasing , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diagnosis-Related Groups/economics , Diagnosis-Related Groups/statistics & numerical data , Dual MEDICAID MEDICARE Eligibility , Economics, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Health Equity/economics , Health Equity/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Medicare/economics , Medicare/statistics & numerical data , Quality of Health Care/economics , Quality of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Value-Based Purchasing/economics , Value-Based Purchasing/statistics & numerical data , Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , Safety-net Providers/economics , Safety-net Providers/ethnology , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Delivery of Health Care/ethnology , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data
3.
BMC Ophthalmol ; 23(1): 82, 2023 Mar 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36864395

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Communication barriers are a major cause of health disparities for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). Medical interpreters play an important role in bridging this gap, however the impact of interpreters on outpatient eye center visits has not been studied. We aimed to evaluate the differences in length of eyecare visits between LEP patients self-identifying as requiring a medical interpreter and English speakers at a tertiary, safety-net hospital in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective review of patient encounter metrics collected by our electronic medical record was conducted for all visits between January 1, 2016 and March 13, 2020. Patient demographics, primary language spoken, self-identified need for interpreter and encounter characteristics including new patient status, patient time waiting for providers and time in room were collected. We compared visit times by patient's self-identification of need for an interpreter, with our main outcomes being time spent with ophthalmic technician, time spent with eyecare provider, and time waiting for eyecare provider. Interpreter services at our hospital are typically remote (via phone or video). RESULTS: A total of 87,157 patient encounters were analyzed, of which 26,443 (30.3%) involved LEP patients identifying as requiring an interpreter. After adjusting for patient age at visit, new patient status, physician status (attending or resident), and repeated patient visits, there was no difference in the length of time spent with technician or physician, or time spent waiting for physician, between English speakers and patients identifying as needing an interpreter. Patients who self-identified as requiring an interpreter were more likely to have an after-visit summary printed for them, and were also more likely to keep their appointment once it was made when compared to English speakers. CONCLUSIONS: Encounters with LEP patients who identify as requiring an interpreter were expected to be longer than those who did not indicate need for an interpreter, however we found that there was no difference in the length of time spent with technician or physician. This suggests providers may adjust their communication strategy during encounters with LEP patients identifying as needing an interpreter. Eyecare providers must be aware of this to prevent negative impacts on patient care. Equally important, healthcare systems should consider ways to prevent unreimbursed extra time from being a financial disincentive for seeing patients who request interpreter services.


Subject(s)
Health Status Disparities , Healthcare Disparities , Language , Limited English Proficiency , Ophthalmology , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital , Humans , Healthcare Disparities/standards , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Ambulatory Care/standards , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Safety-net Providers/standards , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/standards , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Ophthalmology/standards , Ophthalmology/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies
4.
Med Care ; 60(2): 125-132, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35030561

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is not yet known whether socioeconomic factors (ie, social determinants of health) are associated with readmission following hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 6191 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a large New York City safety-net hospital system between March 1 and June 1, 2020. Associations between 30-day readmission and selected demographic characteristics, socioeconomic factors, prior health care utilization, and relevant features of the index hospitalization were analyzed using a multivariable generalized estimating equation model. RESULTS: The readmission rate was 7.3%, with a median of 7 days between discharge and readmission. The following were risk factors for readmission: age 65 and older [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-1.55], history of homelessness, (aOR: 2.03 95% CI: 1.49-2.77), baseline coronary artery disease (aOR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.34-2.10), congestive heart failure (aOR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.20-1.49), cancer (aOR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.26-2.24), chronic kidney disease (aOR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.46-2.07). Patients' sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, and presence of obesity were not associated with increased odds of readmission. A longer length of stay (aOR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-1.00) and use of noninvasive supplemental oxygen (aOR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.56-0.83) was associated with lower odds of readmission. Upon readmission, 18.4% of patients required intensive care, and 13.7% expired. CONCLUSION: We have found some factors associated with increased odds of readmission among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Awareness of these risk factors, including patients' social determinants of health, may ultimately help to reduce readmission rates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , Odds Ratio , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors
5.
Med Care ; 60(2): 140-148, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35030563

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Advanced use of health information technology (IT) functionalities can support more comprehensive, coordinated, and patient-centered primary care services. Safety net practices may benefit disproportionately from these investments, but it is unclear whether IT use in these settings has kept pace and what organizational factors are associated with varying use of these features. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to estimate advanced use of health IT use in safety net versus nonsafety net primary care practices. We explore domains of patient engagement, population health management (decision support and registries), and electronic information exchange. We examine organizational characteristics that may differentially predict advanced use of IT across these settings, with a focus on health system ownership and/or membership in an independent practice network as key factors that may indicate available incentives and resources to support these efforts. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conduct cross-sectional analysis of a national survey of physician practices (n=1776). We use logistic regression to predict advanced IT use in each of our domains based on safety net status and other organizational characteristics. We then use interaction models to assess whether ownership or network membership moderate the relationship between safety net status and advanced use of health IT. RESULTS: Health IT use was common across primary care practices, but advanced use of health IT functionalities ranged only from 30% to 50% use. Safety net settings have kept pace with adoption of features for patient engagement and population management, yet lag in information exchange capabilities compared with nonsafety net practices (odds ratio=0.52 for federally qualified health centers, P<0.001; odds ratio=0.66 for other safety net, P=0.03). However, when safety net practices are members of a health system or practice network, health IT capabilities are comparable to nonsafety net sites. CONCLUSIONS: All outpatient settings would benefit from improved electronic health record usability and implementation support that facilitates advanced use of health IT. Safety net practices, particularly those without other sources of centralized support, need targeted resources to maintain equitable access to information exchange capabilities.


Subject(s)
Health Information Exchange/statistics & numerical data , Ownership/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Humans , Logistic Models , Patient Participation , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Residence Characteristics , Safety-net Providers/organization & administration , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data
6.
Med Care ; 59(12): 1107-1114, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34593712

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The performance of existing predictive models of readmissions, such as the LACE, LACE+, and Epic models, is not established in urban safety-net populations. We assessed previously validated predictive models of readmission performance in a socially complex, urban safety-net population, and if augmentation with additional variables such as the Area Deprivation Index, mental health diagnoses, and housing access improves prediction. Through the addition of new variables, we introduce the LACE-social determinants of health (SDH) model. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult admissions from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018, at a single urban safety-net health system, assessing the performance of the LACE, LACE+, and Epic models in predicting 30-day, unplanned rehospitalization. The LACE-SDH development is presented through logistic regression. Predictive model performance was compared using C-statistics. RESULTS: A total of 16,540 patients met the inclusion criteria. Within the validation cohort (n=8314), the Epic model performed the best (C-statistic=0.71, P<0.05), compared with LACE-SDH (0.67), LACE (0.65), and LACE+ (0.61). The variables most associated with readmissions were (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval) against medical advice discharge (3.19, 2.28-4.45), mental health diagnosis (2.06, 1.72-2.47), and health care utilization (1.94, 1.47-2.55). CONCLUSIONS: The Epic model performed the best in our sample but requires the use of the Epic Electronic Health Record. The LACE-SDH performed significantly better than the LACE and LACE+ models when applied to a safety-net population, demonstrating the importance of accounting for socioeconomic stressors, mental health, and health care utilization in assessing readmission risk in urban safety-net patients.


Subject(s)
Patient Readmission/trends , Risk Assessment/standards , Safety-net Providers/standards , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , Safety-net Providers/methods , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Urban Health Services/organization & administration , Urban Health Services/statistics & numerical data
7.
Prenat Diagn ; 41(11): 1389-1394, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34369603

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify racial disparities in cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) first-line aneuploidy screening use among advanced maternal age women at a safety net hospital. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study of women 35 and older who delivered at Boston Medical Center from 2012 to 2015 compared to women who used cffDNA for first-line aneuploidy screening to those who did not. Maternal conventional demographics and social determinants of health were collected. We investigated the relationship between race and odds of cffDNA use, adjusting for covariates by stepwise logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 1223 women. Seventy-two percent were publicly insured. Upon adjusting for parity, prenatal care site, year of delivery, and insurance status, odds of cffNDA use remained lower for Black and Hispanic women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30, 0.71 and aOR 0.34 [0.21, 0.55]) compared to White women. Language proved to be an effect modifier among Hispanic women that attenuated but did not resolve the disparity in use among Hispanic compared to White women. Racial differences in cffDNA use persisted across the study period. CONCLUSION: Disparity in cffDNA screening uptake exists by race in this diverse urban population. The gap in utilization between Hispanic and White women may be related to primary preferred language.


Subject(s)
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing/statistics & numerical data , Racial Groups/psychology , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Analysis of Variance , Boston , Chi-Square Distribution , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Noninvasive Prenatal Testing/methods , Pregnancy , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/organization & administration
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(8): e2120159, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34374771

ABSTRACT

Importance: The effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, including fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), relies on colonoscopy completion among patients with abnormal results, but in safety net systems and federally qualified health centers, in which FIT is frequently used, colonoscopy completion within 1 year of an abnormal result rarely exceeds 50%. Clinician-identified factors in follow-up of abnormal FIT results are understudied and could lead to more effective interventions to address this issue. Objective: To describe clinician-identified barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy completion among patients with abnormal FIT results in a safety net health care system. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study was conducted using semistructured key informant interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs) and staff members in a large safety net health care system in Washington state. Eligible clinicians were recruited through all-staff meetings and clinic medical directors. Interviews were conducted from February to December 2020 through face-to-face interactions or digital meeting platforms. Interview transcripts were analyzed deductively and inductively using a content analysis approach. Data were analyzed from September through December 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Barriers and facilitators to colonoscopy completion after an abnormal FIT result were identified by PCPs and staff members. Results: Among 21 participants, there were 10 PCPs and 11 staff members; 20 participants provided demographic information. The median (interquartile range) age was 38.5 (33.0-51.5) years, 17 (85.0%) were women, and 9 participants (45.0%) spent more than 75% of their working time engaging in patient care. All participants identified social determinants of health, organizational factors, and patient cognitive factors as barriers to colonoscopy completion. Participants suggested that existing resources that addressed these factors facilitated colonoscopy completion but were insufficient to meet national follow-up colonoscopy goals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, responses of interviewed PCPs and staff members suggested that the barriers to colonoscopy completion in a safety net health system may be modifiable. These findings suggest that interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal FIT results should be informed by clinician-identified factors to address multilevel challenges to colonoscopy completion.


Subject(s)
Aftercare/psychology , Aftercare/standards , Attitude to Health , Colonoscopy/standards , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Patients/psychology , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Occult Blood , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Social Determinants of Health , Washington
9.
J Am Coll Surg ; 233(6): 764-775.e1, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34438081

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Older patients with frailty syndrome have a greater risk of poor postoperative outcomes. In this study, we used a RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework to implement an assessment tool to identify frail patients and targeted interventions to improve their outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: We implemented a 5-question frailty assessment tool for patients 65 years and older admitted to the general and vascular surgery services from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019. Identified frail patients received evidence-based clinical orders and nursing care plan interventions tailored to optimize recovery. A RE-AIM framework was used to assess implementation effectiveness through provider and nurse surveys, floor audits, and chart review. RESULTS: Of 1,158 patients included in this study, 696 (60.1%) were assessed for frailty. Among these, 611 patients (87.8%) scored as frail or intermediately frail. After implementation, there were significant increases in the completion rates of frailty-specific care orders for frail patients, including delirium precautions (52.1% vs 30.7%; p < 0.001), aspiration precautions (50.0% vs 26.9%; p < 0.001), and avoidance of overnight vitals (32.5% vs 0%). Floor audits, however, showed high variability in completion of care plan components by nursing staff. Multivariate analysis showed significant decreases in 30-day complication rates (odds ratio 0.532; p < 0.001) after implementation. CONCLUSIONS: A frailty assessment was able to identify elderly patients for provision of targeted, evidence-based frailty care. Despite limited uptake of the assessment by providers and completion of care plan components by nursing staff, implementation of the assessment and care interventions was associated with substantial decreases in complications among elderly surgical patients.


Subject(s)
Frailty/diagnosis , Geriatric Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Patient Care Planning/organization & administration , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Vascular Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Frailty/epidemiology , Frailty/therapy , Health Plan Implementation/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Urban/organization & administration , Hospitals, Urban/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Patient Care Planning/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Program Evaluation , Quality Improvement , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , Safety-net Providers/organization & administration , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
10.
J Surg Oncol ; 124(7): 983-988, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34291824

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions in operative and hospital capabilities as the country triaged resources and canceled elective procedures. This study details the operative experience of a safety-net hospital for cancer-related operations during a 3-month period at the height of the pandemic. METHODS: Patients operated on for or diagnosed with malignancies of the abdomen, breast, skin, or soft-tissue (September 3, 2020-September 6, 2020) were identified from operative/clinic schedules. Sociodemographics, tumor and treatment characteristics, and COVID-19 information was identified through retrospective chart review of a prospectively maintained database. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Fifty patients evaluated within this window underwent oncologic surgery. Median age was 61 (interquartile range: 53-68), 56% were female, 86% were White, and 66% were Hispanic. The majority (28%) were for colon cancer. Only two patients tested positive for COVID-19 preoperatively or within 30 days of their operation. There were no mortalities during the 1-year study period. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals and operative centers limited interventions to preserve resources, but oncologic procedures continued at many large-volume academic cancer centers. This study underscores the importance of continuing to offer surgery during the pandemic for surgical oncology cases at safety-net hospitals to minimize delays in time-sensitive oncologic treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Hospitals, High-Volume/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/surgery , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Female , Florida/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/virology , Retrospective Studies , Surgical Oncology
11.
J Surg Oncol ; 124(4): 551-559, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34061369

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Perioperative therapy is a favored treatment strategy for gastric cancer. We sought to assess utilization of this approach at safety net hospitals (SNH) and tertiary referral centers (TRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) with resectable gastric cancer across five SNH and their sister TRC were included. Primary outcomes were receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and perioperative therapy. RESULTS: Of 284 patients, 36% and 64% received care at SNH and TRC. The distribution of Stage II/III resectable disease was similar across facilities. Receipt of NAC at SNH and TRC was similar (56% vs. 46%, p = 0.27). Compared with overall clinical stage, 38% and 36% were pathologically downstaged at SNH and TRC, respectively. Among patients who received NAC, those who also received adjuvant chemotherapy at SNH and TRC were similar (66% vs. 60%, p = 0.50). Asian race and higher clinical stage were associated with receipt of perioperative therapy (both p < 0.05) while treatment facility type was not. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in utilization of a perioperative treatment strategy between facility types for patients with gastric cancer. Pathologic downstaging from NAC was similar across treatment facilities, suggesting similar quality and duration of therapy. Treatment at an SNH is not a barrier to receiving standard-of-care perioperative therapy for gastric cancer.


Subject(s)
Gastrectomy/methods , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Perioperative Care , Quality of Health Care , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Stomach Neoplasms/surgery
13.
Health Serv Res ; 56(5): 788-801, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34173227

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Between January 2005 and July 2020, 171 rural hospitals closed across the United States. Little is known about the extent that other providers step in to fill the potential reduction in access from a rural hospital closure. The objective of this analysis is to evaluate the trends of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and Rural Health Clinics (RHCs) in rural areas prior to and following hospital closure. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: We used publicly available data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Provider of Services files, Cecil G. Sheps Center rural hospital closures list, and Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates. STUDY DESIGN: We described the trends over time in the number of hospitals, hospital closures, FQHC sites, and RHCs in rural and urban ZIP codes, 2006-2018. We used two-way fixed effects and pooled generalized linear models with a logit link to estimate the probabilities of having any RHC and any FQHC within 10 straight-line miles. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Compared to hospitals that never closed, the predicted probability of having any FQHC within 10 miles increased post closure by 5.95 and 11.57 percentage points at 1 year and 5 years, respectively (p < 0.05). The predicted probability of having any RHC within 10 miles was not significantly different following rural hospital closure. A percentage point increase in poverty rate was associated with a 1.98 and a 1.29 percentage point increase in probabilities of having an FQHC or RHC, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In areas previously served by a rural hospital, there is a higher probability of new FQHC service-delivery sites post closure. This suggests that some of the potential reductions in access to essential preventive and diagnostic services may be filled by FQHCs. However, many rural communities may have a persistent unmet need for preventive and therapeutic care.


Subject(s)
Health Facility Closure/trends , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Rural Health Services/trends , Safety-net Providers/trends , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S. , Health Facility Closure/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Rural Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , United States
14.
Crit Care Med ; 49(10): 1739-1748, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34115635

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare resources even in wealthy nations, necessitating rationing of limited resources without previously established crisis standards of care protocols. In Massachusetts, triage guidelines were designed based on acute illness and chronic life-limiting conditions. In this study, we sought to retrospectively validate this protocol to cohorts of critically ill patients from our hospital. DESIGN: We applied our hospital-adopted guidelines, which defined severe and major chronic conditions as those associated with a greater than 50% likelihood of 1- and 5-year mortality, respectively, to a critically ill patient population. We investigated mortality for the same intervals. SETTING: An urban safety-net hospital ICU. PATIENTS: All adults hospitalized during April of 2015 and April 2019 identified through a clinical database search. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 365 admitted patients, 15.89% had one or more defined chronic life-limiting conditions. These patients had higher 1-year (46.55% vs 13.68%; p < 0.01) and 5-year (50.00% vs 17.22%; p < 0.01) mortality rates than those without underlying conditions. Irrespective of classification of disease severity, patients with metastatic cancer, congestive heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and neurodegenerative disease had greater than 50% 1-year mortality, whereas patients with chronic lung disease and cirrhosis had less than 50% 1-year mortality. Observed 1- and 5-year mortality for cirrhosis, heart failure, and metastatic cancer were more variable when subdivided into severe and major categories. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with major and severe chronic medical conditions overall had 46.55% and 50.00% mortality at 1 and 5 years, respectively. However, mortality varied between conditions. Our findings appear to support a crisis standards protocol which focuses on acute illness severity and only considers underlying conditions carrying a greater than 50% predicted likelihood of 1-year mortality. Modifications to the chronic lung disease, congestive heart failure, and cirrhosis criteria should be refined if they are to be included in future models.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Crisis Intervention/standards , Resource Allocation/methods , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Crisis Intervention/methods , Crisis Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Massachusetts , Middle Aged , Resource Allocation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/organization & administration , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Standard of Care/standards , Standard of Care/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data
15.
Gynecol Oncol ; 162(2): 308-314, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34090706

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine eligibility for discontinuation of cervical cancer screening. METHODS: Women aged 64 with employer-sponsored insurance enrolled in a national database between 2016 and 2018, and those aged 64-66 receiving primary care at a safety net health center in 2019 were included. Patients were evaluated for screening exit eligibility by current guidelines: no evidence of cervical cancer or HIV-positive status and no evidence of cervical precancer in the past 25 years, and had evidence of either hysterectomy with removal of the cervix or evidence of fulfilling screening exit criteria, defined as two HPV screening tests or HPV plus Pap co-tests or three Pap tests within the past 10 years without evidence of an abnormal result. RESULTS: Of the 590,901 women in the national claims database, 131,059 (22.2%) were eligible to exit due to hysterectomy (1.6%) or negative screening (20.6%). Of the 1544 women from the safety net health center, 528 (34.2%) were eligible to exit due to hysterectomy (9.3%) or negative screening (24.9%). Most women did not have sufficient data available to fulfill exit criteria: 382,509 (64.7%) in the national database and 875 (56.7%) in the safety net hospital system. Even among women with 10 years of insurance claims data, only 41.5% qualified to discontinue screening. CONCLUSIONS: Examining insurance claims in a national database and electronic medical records at a safety net institution led to remarkably similar findings: two thirds of women fail to qualify for screening exit. Additional steps to ensure eligibility prior to screening exit may be necessary to decrease preventable cervical cancers among women aged >65. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: N/A.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Eligibility Determination/standards , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Administrative Claims, Healthcare/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Cohort Studies , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Eligibility Determination/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Hysterectomy/statistics & numerical data , Insurance Coverage/standards , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Papanicolaou Test/statistics & numerical data , Papillomavirus Infections/pathology , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Safety-net Providers/standards , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , United States , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaginal Smears/statistics & numerical data
16.
Cancer Treat Res Commun ; 28: 100418, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34118790

ABSTRACT

Patients with cancer are a vulnerable population during the COVID-19 pandemic due to underlying immunosuppression, pre-existing comorbidities, and poor nutrition. There is a lack of data describing the disease course of cancer patients with COVID-19 disease. Therefore, we analyzed data from cancer patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to our hospital. Cancer patients were categorized into two groups as survivors and non-survivors of COVID-19. Among 68 cancer patients with COVID-19, 27% of patients were admitted to ICU, and 37% of the patients died. The median age was 72, and non-survivors were older than survivors (p = 0.001). Non-survivors had higher comorbidity scores, late-stage cancer, and worse ECOG performance status than survivors (all p values<0.005). Non-survivors also had significantly lower lymphocyte count and albumin level but higher lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, troponin, and ferritin levels than survivors. On multivariable analysis, increased age and mechanical ventilation were associated with increased odds of death. We report no association between anti-cancer treatments and mortality from COVID-19 disease. In summary, cancer patients have higher mortality of COVID-19 infection than the general population. In addition to generally known risk factors, the high mortality rate in cancer patients with COVID-19 is associated with several cancer-specific factors.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/etiology , Neoplasms/virology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Female , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
17.
BMC Cancer ; 21(1): 554, 2021 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34001038

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Will Rogers phenomenon [WRP] describes an apparent improvement in outcome for patients' group due to tumor grade reclassification. Staging of cancers is important to select appropriate treatment and to estimate prognosis. The WRP has been described as one of the most important biases limiting the use of historical cohorts when comparing survival or treatment. The main purpose of this study is to assess whether the WRP exists with the move from the AJCC 7th to AJCC 8th edition in breast cancer [BC] staging, and if racial differences are manifested in the expression of the WRP. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 300 BC women (2007-2017) at an academic medical center. Overall survival [OS] and disease-free survival [DFS] was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Bi and multi-variate Cox regression analyses was used to identify racial factors associated with outcomes. RESULTS: Our patient cohort included 30.3% Caucasians [Whites] and 69.7% African-Americans [Blacks]. Stages I, II, III, and IV were 46.2, 26.3, 23.1, and 4.4% of Whites; 28.7, 43.1, 24.4, and 3.8% of Blacks respectively, in anatomic staging (p = 0.043). In prognostic staging, 52.8, 18.7, 23, and 5.5% were Whites while 35, 17.2, 43.5, and 4.3% were Blacks, respectively (p = 0.011). A total of Whites (45.05% vs. 47.85%) Blacks, upstaged. Whites (16.49% vs. 14.35%) Blacks, downstaged. The remaining, 38.46 and 37.79% patients had their stages unchanged. With a median follow-up of 54 months, the Black patients showed better stage-by-stage 5-year OS rates using 8th edition compared to the 7th edition (p = 0.000). Among the Whites, those who were stage IIIA in the 7th but became stage IB in the 8th had a better prognosis than stages IIA and IIB in the 8th (p = 0.000). The 8th showed complex results (p = 0.176) compared to DFS estimated using the 7th edition (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The WRP exists with significant variability in the move from the AJCC 7th to the 8th edition in BC staging (both White and Black patients). We suggest that caution needs to be exercised when results are compared across staging systems to account for the WRP in the interpretation of the data.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Black or African American/statistics & numerical data , Breast/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/ethnology , Breast Neoplasms/mortality , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Disease-Free Survival , Follow-Up Studies , Health Status Disparities , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Mississippi/epidemiology , Neoplasm Grading/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasm Staging/statistics & numerical data , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Survival Rate , White
18.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(4): e218075, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33904912

ABSTRACT

Importance: Overuse of health care services exposes patients to unnecessary risk of harm and costs. Distinguishing patterns of overuse among hospitals requires hospital-level measures across multiple services. Objective: To describe characteristics of hospitals associated with overuse of health care services in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional analysis used Medicare fee-for-service claims data for beneficiaries older than 65 years from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017, with a lookback of 1 year. Inpatient and outpatient services were included, and services offered at specialty and federal hospitals were excluded. Patients were from hospitals with the capacity (based on a claims filter developed for this study) to perform at least 7 of 12 investigated services. Statistical analyses were performed from July 1, 2020, to December 20, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were a composite overuse score ranging from 0 (no overuse of services) to 1 (relatively high overuse of services) and characteristics of hospitals clustered by overuse rates. Twelve published low-value service algorithms were applied to the data to find overuse rates for each hospital, normalized and aggregated to a composite score and then compared across 6 hospital characteristics using multivariable regression. A k-means cluster analysis was used on normalized overuse rates to identify hospital clusters. Results: The primary analysis was performed on 2415 cohort A hospitals (ie, hospitals with capacity for 7 or more services), which included 1 263 592 patients (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [14] years; 678 549 women [53.7%]; 101 017 191 White patients [80.5%]). Head imaging for syncope was the highest-volume low-value service (377 745 patients [29.9%]), followed by coronary artery stenting for stable coronary disease (199 579 [15.8%]). The mean (SD) composite overuse score was 0.40 (0.10) points. Southern hospitals had a higher mean score than midwestern (difference in means: 0.06 [95% CI, 0.05-0.07] points; P < .001), northeast (0.08 [95% CI, 0.06-0.09] points; P < .001), and western hospitals (0.08 [95% CI, 0.07-0.10] points; P < .001). Nonprofit hospitals had a lower adjusted mean score than for-profit hospitals (-0.03 [95% CI, -0.04 to -0.02] points; P < .001). Major teaching hospitals had significantly lower adjusted mean overuse scores vs minor teaching hospitals (difference in means, -0.07 [95% CI, -0.08 to -0.06] points; P < .001) and nonteaching hospitals (-0.10 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.09] points; P < .001). Of the 4 clusters identified, 1 was characterized by its low counts of overuse in all services except for spinal fusion; the majority of major teaching hospitals were in this cluster (164 of 223 major teaching hospitals [73.5%]). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study used a novel measurement of hospital-associated overuse; results showed that the highest scores in this Medicare population were associated with nonteaching and for-profit hospitals, particularly in the South.


Subject(s)
Hospitals, Proprietary/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Teaching/statistics & numerical data , Medical Overuse/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Fee-for-Service Plans , Female , Hospital Bed Capacity/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Rural/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Urban/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Voluntary/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Medicare , Midwestern United States , New England , Northwestern United States , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Southeastern United States , Southwestern United States , United States
19.
Am J Perinatol ; 38(7): 741-746, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33853145

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe maternal characteristics and clinical outcomes of infants born to mothers with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests during pregnancy at an urban, safety-net hospital in Boston. STUDY DESIGN: We abstracted electronic chart data from 75 pregnant women with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests at any stage of gestation until 72 hours after birth who delivered consecutively between March 31 and August 6, 2020 at our center. We collected clinical data on maternal and infant characteristics, including testing, signs, and symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), delivery outcomes, newborn care practices (skin-to-skin care, location of care, and breastfeeding) and 30-day postdischarge infant emergency room visits and readmissions. We described categorical characteristics as percentages for this case series. RESULTS: Among 75 pregnant women, 47 (63%) were Hispanic, 10 (13%) had hypertension, 23 (30%) had prepregnancy obesity, and 57 (76%) had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Regarding birth outcomes, 32 (41%) had cesarean delivery and 14 (19%) had preterm birth. Among 75 infants, 5 (7%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction tests in the first week of life, all of whom were born to Hispanic mothers with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and had clinical courses consistent with gestational age. Six (8%) infants visited the emergency department within 30 days of discharge; one was admitted with a non-COVID-19 diagnosis. CONCLUSION: At our urban, safety-net hospital among pregnant women with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests, 41% had a cesarean delivery and 19% had a preterm birth. Seven percent of infants had one or more positive SARS-CoV-2 tests and all infants had clinical courses expected for gestational age. KEY POINTS: · Among 75 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 positive testing at our center, five infants (7%) had one or more SARS-CoV-2 positive tests in the first week of life.. · Infants with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests had clinical courses expected for gestational age..


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Infant, Newborn, Diseases , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Boston/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/transmission , Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Female , Gestational Age , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant Care/methods , Infant Care/statistics & numerical data , Infant, Newborn , Infant, Newborn, Diseases/epidemiology , Infant, Newborn, Diseases/virology , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/therapy , Pregnancy Outcome , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data
20.
J Surg Res ; 264: 279-286, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33839343

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Safety-net hospitals serve a vital role in society by providing care for vulnerable populations. Existing data regarding oncologic outcomes of patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals are limited and variable. The objective of this study was to delineate disparities in treatment and outcomes for patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified 802,304 adult patients with colon adenocarcinoma from the National Cancer Database between 2004-2016. Patients were stratified according to safety-net burden of the treating hospital as previously described. Patient, tumor, facility, and treatment characteristics were compared between groups as were operative and short-term outcomes. Cox proportional hazards regression was utilized to compare overall survival between patients treated at high, medium, and low burden hospitals. RESULTS: Patients treated at safety-net hospitals were demographically distinct and presented with more advanced disease. They were also less likely to receive surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, negative resection margins, adequate lymphadenectomy, or a minimally invasive operative approach. On multivariate analysis adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, survival was inferior for patients at safety-net hospitals, even for those with stage 0 (in situ) disease. CONCLUSION: This analysis revealed inferior survival for patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals, including those without invasive cancer. These findings suggest that unmeasured population differences may confound analyses and affect survival more than provider or treatment disparities.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Colonic Neoplasms/mortality , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Vulnerable Populations/statistics & numerical data , Adenocarcinoma/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma/economics , Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/economics , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/statistics & numerical data , Colectomy/economics , Colectomy/statistics & numerical data , Colon/pathology , Colon/surgery , Colonic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colonic Neoplasms/economics , Colonic Neoplasms/therapy , Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data , Female , Healthcare Disparities/economics , Humans , Male , Margins of Excision , Medically Uninsured/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Safety-net Providers/economics , Survival Analysis , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...