Misaligned Supports: Differences in Reported Health Care Worker Well-being Supports Provided and Needed During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: To describe the well-being supports provided to health care workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in health centers and hospitals. DESIGN: Cross-sectional qualitative interviews before and after implementation of a peer-based support intervention. SETTING: Purposively sampled hospitals and health centers across the US. PARTICIPANTS: 28 site leaders and 56 HCWs sampled from 16 hospitals and 12 health centers. METHOD: Site leaders and HCWs were asked to describe supports available to HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thematic and content coding and analysis of interview responses were conducted using Dedoose. RESULTS: Both site leaders and HCWs identified a range of support resources available. Communication resources were the most frequently cited in both groups. Health care workers reported bi-directional communication, while one-way communication was emphasized by site leaders. Hospitals highlighted counseling support, particularly Employee Assistance Programs (EAP), while health centers prioritized community support. Wellness activities were more prevalent in hospital settings, while health centers offered specific workplace-provided training for HCWs. Health care workers encountered barriers when accessing support, including limited time, fear of stigma, and disruptions to their existing support networks attributable to the pandemic. CONCLUSION: While there are resources for HCWs, the available supports may not align with their needs and barriers to access may limit the effectiveness of these supports. Continued engagement between leaders and HCWs could help better align resources with needs.

Health Care Provider Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Adult Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Recommendations - United States, September 28-October 10, 2022.

Despite the availability of effective vaccines against pneumococcal disease, pneumococcus is a common bacterial cause of pneumonia, causing approximately 100,000 hospitalizations among U.S. adults per year. In addition, approximately 30,000 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) cases and 3,000 IPD deaths occur among U.S. adults each year. Previous health care provider surveys identified gaps in provider knowledge about and understanding of the adult pneumococcal vaccine recommendations, and pneumococcal vaccine coverage remains suboptimal. To assess the feasibility and acceptability domains of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) framework, a health care provider knowledge and attitudes survey was conducted during September 28-October 10, 2022, by the Healthcare and Public Perceptions of Immunizations Survey Collaborative before the October 2022 ACIP meeting. Among 751 provider respondents, two thirds agreed or strongly agreed with the policy option under consideration to expand the recommendations for the new 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) to adults who had only received the previously recommended 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13). Gaps in providers' knowledge and perceived challenges to implementing recommendations were identified and were included in ACIP's EtR framework discussions in late October 2022 when ACIP updated the recommendations for PCV20 use in adults. Currently, use of PCV20 is recommended for certain adults who have previously received PCV13, in addition to those who have never received a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. The survey findings indicate a need to increase provider awareness and implementation of pneumococcal vaccination recommendations and to provide tools to assist with patient-specific vaccination guidance. Resources available to address the challenges to implementing pneumococcal vaccination recommendations include the PneumoRecs VaxAdvisor mobile app and other CDC-developed tools, including summary documents and overviews of vaccination schedules and CDC's strategic framework to increase confidence in vaccines and reduce vaccine-preventable diseases, Vaccinate with Confidence.

Unvaccinated Adolescents' COVID-19 Vaccine Intentions: Implications for Public Health Messaging.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 vaccine uptake remains low for US adolescents and contributes to excess morbidity and mortality. Most research has assessed parental intention to vaccinate their children. We explored differences between vaccine-acceptant and vaccine-hesitant unvaccinated US adolescents using national survey data. METHODS: A nonprobability, quota-based sample of adolescents, aged 13-17 years, was recruited through an online survey panel in April 2021. One thousand nine hundred twenty seven adolescents were screened for participation and the final sample included 985 responses. We assessed responses from unvaccinated adolescents (n = 831). Our primary measure was COVID-19 vaccination intent ("vaccine-acceptant" defined as "definitely will" get a COVID-19 vaccine and any other response classified as "vaccine-hesitant") and secondary measures included reasons for intending or not intending to get vaccinated and trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information. We calculated descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to explore differences between vaccine-acceptant and vaccine-hesitant adolescents. RESULTS: Most (n = 831; 70.9%) adolescents were hesitant, with more hesitancy observed among adolescents with low levels of concern about COVID-19 and high levels of concern about side effects of COVID-19 vaccination. Among vaccine-hesitant adolescents, reasons for not intending to get vaccinated included waiting for safety data and having parents who would make the vaccination decision. Vaccine-hesitant adolescents had a lower number of trusted information sources than vaccine-acceptant adolescents. DISCUSSION: Differences identified between vaccine-acceptant and vaccine-hesitant adolescents can inform message content and dissemination. Messages should include accurate, age-appropriate information about side effects and risks of COVID-19 infection. Prioritizing dissemination of these messages through family members, state and local government officials, and healthcare providers may be most effective.

Health care provider knowledge around shared clinical decision-making regarding HPV vaccination of adults aged 27-45 years in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends shared clinical decision-making (SCDM) regarding HPV vaccination for adults aged 27-45 years who are not adequately vaccinated. The objective of this survey was to understand physician knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding HPV vaccination in this age group. METHODS: An online survey was administered in June 2021 to physicians who reported practicing internal medicine, family medicine, or obstetrics and gynecology (targeted N = 250 in each practice specialty), selected randomly from potentially eligible physicians from a panel of 2 million U.S. health care providers. RESULTS: In total, 753 physicians participated in the survey: 33.3% practiced internal medicine, 33.1% practiced family medicine, and 33.6% practiced obstetrics/gynecology; 62.5% were male and mean physician age was 52.7 years. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, at least a third of participating physicians in each practice specialty reported having more HPV vaccine SCDM discussions with patients aged 27-45 years in the past 12 months. While a majority of physicians (79.7%) reported being aware of the SCDM recommendation for adults in this age group, only half of physicians answered an objective knowledge question about SCDM recommendations correctly. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that there are physician knowledge gaps related to SCDM for HPV vaccination. To improve access to HPV vaccination for people most likely to benefit, increasing availability and use of decision aids to support SCDM discussions might help healthcare providers and patients jointly make the most informed decisions about HPV vaccination.

Parental Perceptions Related to Co-Administration of Adolescent COVID-19 and Routine Vaccines.

PURPOSE: Vaccinating adolescents against COVID-19 while avoiding delays in other routine vaccination is paramount to protecting their health. Our objective was to assess parental preferences to have their adolescents aged 12-17 years receive COVID-19 and other routine vaccines at the same time. METHODS: An online survey with a national, quota-based cross-sectional sample of United States parents of youth aged 12-17 years was fielded in April 2021 ahead of FDA's Emergency Use Authorization of COVID-19 vaccine for age 12-15 years. Parents were asked about their willingness to have their adolescents aged 12-17 years receive both COVID-19 and routine vaccines at the same visit and/or to follow their provider's recommendation. Predictors included demographic characteristics, being behind on routine vaccines, and perceived risks and benefits. RESULTS: Few parents were willing to have their adolescent receive COVID-19 and routine vaccines at the same visit (10.6%) or follow the healthcare provider's recommendation (18.5%). In multivariate analyses, demographic characteristics had no effect on willingness, reporting that the adolescent was behind on routine vaccines correlated with decreased willingness (p = .004). Greater concern about the adolescent getting COVID-19 (p = .001), lower concern about the adolescent having side effects from the COVID-19 vaccine (p = .013), and more positive feelings about vaccines in general (p = .002) were associated with higher willingness. DISCUSSION: Few parents would prefer to have their adolescents receive COVID-19 and routine vaccines at the same visit. Understanding what drives willingness to receive all recommended vaccines in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic could inform policies to optimize adolescent vaccination.

Association of COVID-19 Vaccination With Influenza Vaccine History and Changes in Influenza Vaccination.

This survey study assesses how COVID-19 vaccination differs across historical influenza vaccination patterns and whether influenza vaccination changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Access to Health Care Among TRICARE-Covered Children.

TRICARE, the U.S. Department of Defense insurance program for eligible service members and their dependents, provides health care coverage to nearly 2 million children under the age of 18. Survey data and prior evaluations indicate that TRICARE-covered children face challenges in accessing pediatric health care, with the greatest challenges among children who have experienced frequent relocations and children with special health care needs. However, TRICARE has not measured pediatric patient experiences in accessing care since 2010. To fill this gap, RAND researchers analyzed national survey data on the experiences of caregivers of TRICARE-covered children and children with commercial insurance, public insurance, and no insurance to identify differences in access to pediatric care, necessary referrals, care coordination support, ability to pay medical bills, and other factors. Additional analyses highlight variations between children with different TRICARE plans, between children who have changed addresses more and less frequently, and between children with special health care needs and those without. The findings should help inform efforts to increase access to care for children across the Military Health System, as well as improvements to programs designed to support military families during relocations and those with children who have special health care needs.

COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions, Concerns, and Facilitators Among US Parents of Children Ages 6 Months Through 4 Years.

Importance: Children aged 6 months through 4 years have become eligible for COVID-19 vaccination, but little is known about parental intentions regarding, concerns about, or facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. Objectives: To evaluate parental intentions, concerns, and facilitators for COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 6 months through 4 years and to help inform the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' deliberations and recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 6 months through 4 years. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study fielded an online survey from February 2 to 10, 2022, among a nonprobability sample of US parents of children aged 6 months through 4 years who were recruited through Qualtrics using quota-based sampling for respondent gender, race and ethnicity, and child age group. Main Outcomes and Measures: COVID-19 vaccination intentions, time to COVID-19 vaccination, COVID-19 vaccination concerns and facilitators, and trusted COVID-19 vaccination locations for children aged 6 months through 4 years. Results: The final weighted sample of 2031 participants (73.5% participation rate) had more respondents who identified as male (985; weighted percentage, 54.8%) or White (696; weighted percentage, 66.2%), were aged 25 to 49 years (1628; weighted percentage, 85.6%), had at least a bachelor's degree (711; weighted percentage, 40.0%), lived in a metropolitan area (1743; weighted percentage, 82.9%) or the South (961; weighted percentage, 43.4%), or received at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (1205; weighted percentage, 59.8%). Half of respondents (645; weighted percentage, 45.6%) indicated that they "definitely" or "probably" will vaccinate their child aged 6 months through 4 years once they became eligible. However, only one-fifth (396; weighted percentage, 19.0%) indicated they would get a COVID-19 vaccine for their child in this age group within 3 months of them becoming eligible for vaccination. Vaccine safety and efficacy were parents' top concerns, and receiving more information about safety and efficacy were the top facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. A doctor's office or clinic and local pharmacy were the most trusted COVID-19 vaccination locations for this age group. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that only a minority of parents of children in this age group are eager to vaccinate their children within the first few months of eligibility, with widespread concerns about COVID-19 vaccination for this age group. Thus, considerable efforts to increase parental COVID-19 vaccine confidence for children aged 6 months through 4 years may be needed to maximize COVID-19 vaccination for this age group in the United States.

Messaging Strategies for Mitigating COVID-19 Through Vaccination and Nonpharmaceutical Interventions.

With new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and likely more to come, the (extraordinarily complex) logistics of deploying them have gotten underway. Public health officials across the country face a daunting task: convincing the majority of individuals to queue up for shots while also maintaining a steady supply of doses and efficient appointment sign-ups. The road ahead is still long and, even with increasing vaccination, will still require adherence with other effective public health behaviors, such as mask-wearing. This article addresses the importance of effectively matching the message, the audience, and the sender for messages to promote uptake of vaccination and of such behaviors as mask-wearing. It offers suggestions about how to leverage such factors as variations in risk perception and variation among U.S. subcultures regarding tendencies to follow rules and to act for the good of the group. The authors also review evidence that suggests health messages should engage directly with misinformation to refute it.

Health Services and Primary Care Research Study: Comprehensive Report.

This study presents the results of a congressionally mandated, independent assessment of federally funded health services research (HSR) and primary care research (PCR) spanning the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from FYs 2012 to 2018. Through technical expert panels, stakeholder interviews, and a systematic environmental scan of research grants and contracts funded by HHS and the VA, the authors characterize the distinct contributions of agencies in these departments to the federal HSR and PCR enterprise. The authors also identify opportunities to improve detection and coordination of overlap in agency research portfolios, the impacts of HSR and PCR and how they cumulate across research portfolios, and gaps in research funding, methods, and dissemination. The authors offer recommendations to maximize the outcomes and value of future investments in federal HSR and PCR to better guide and serve the needs of a complex and rapidly changing U.S. health care system.

Protecting the mental and physical well-being of frontline health care workers during COVID-19: Study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed health care workers at unprecedented risk of stress, burnout, and moral injury. This paper describes the design of an ongoing cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of Stress First Aid (SFA) to Usual Care (UC) in protecting the well-being of frontline health care workers. METHODS: We plan to recruit a diverse set of hospitals and health centers (eight matched pairs of hospitals and six pairs of centers), with a goal of approximately 50 HCW per health center and 170 per hospital. Participating sites in each pair are randomly assigned to SFA or UC (i.e., whatever psychosocial support is currently being received by HCW). Each site identified a leader to provide organizational support of the study; SFA sites also identified at least one champion to be trained in the intervention. Using a "train the trainer" model, champions in turn trained their peers in selected HCW teams or units to implement SFA over an eight-week period. We surveyed HCW before and after the implementation period. The primary outcomes are posttraumatic stress disorder and general psychological distress; secondary outcomes include depression and anxiety symptoms, sleep problems, social functioning problems, burnout, moral distress, and resilience. In addition, through in-depth qualitative interviews with leaders, champions, and HCW, we assessed the implementation of SFA, including acceptability, feasibility, and uptake. DISCUSSION: Results from this study will provide initial evidence for the application of SFA to support HCW well-being during a pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (Clinicaltrials.govNCT04723576).

Reciprocal relationships among influenza experiences, perceptions, and behavior: Results from a national, longitudinal survey of United States adults.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to model the reciprocal relationships of perceived risk of contracting influenza with and without influenza vaccination, vaccination behavior, and reported influenza illness. METHODS: We fit structural equation models to data from a longitudinal survey of adults in the United States collected through the RAND American Life Panel. Data come from fall and spring surveys fielded before and after each of 3 influenza seasons, 2016/2017, 2017/2018, and 2018/2019, for a total of 6 waves. RESULTS: As expected, reported influenza experience was associated with increased perceived influenza risk in subsequent survey waves. Furthermore, perceived risk was associated with subsequent vaccination behavior, such that vaccination was more common for those with higher perceived unvaccinated influenza risk and lower perceived vaccinated influenza risk. Perhaps surprisingly, both elements of perceived risk were also associated with a greater likelihood of subsequent reported influenza illness. This malleability in illness reports may reflect uncertainty, as more respondents reported being sick but being unsure about whether they had influenza than reported certainty that they had influenza. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that influence perceptions about past experience with influenza, including increased testing and informational campaigns about influenza symptoms, could have unanticipated impacts on perceptions of influenza vaccination and vaccination behavior.

Association among trust in health care providers, friends, and family, and vaccine hesitancy.

A health care provider's vaccination recommendation is one of the most important factors influencing parents' decisions about whether to vaccinate their children. Unfortunately, vaccine hesitancy is associated with mistrust of health care providers and the medical system. We conducted a survey of 2440 adults through the RAND American Life Panel in 2019. Respondents were asked to rate their trust in pediatricians, OB/GYNs, doulas, midwives, lactation consultants, friends and family for information about childhood vaccines. Respondents were also asked about willingness to vaccinate a hypothetical child as a measure of vaccine hesitancy. We used principal component analysis to characterize variance in responses on trust items and logistic regression to model the relationship between trust and vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with: (1) lower overall trust; (2) reduced trust in OB/GYNs and pediatricians and greater trust in doulas, midwives, and lactation consultants; and (3) greater trust in friends and family.

Acceptability of Adolescent COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adolescents and Parents of Adolescents - United States, April 15-23, 2021.

On May 10, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded its Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12-15 years; this authorization was followed by interim recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for the vaccine among this age group (1). Using data from nonprobability-based Internet panel surveys administered by the Healthcare and Public Perceptions of Immunizations (HaPPI) Survey Collaborative, the acceptability of adolescent COVID-19 vaccination and self-reported factors increasing vaccination intent were assessed among independently recruited samples of 985 adolescents aged 13-17 years and 1,022 parents and guardians (parents) of adolescents aged 12-17 years during April 15-April 23, 2021, prior to vaccine authorization for this age group. Approximately one quarter (27.6%) of parents whose adolescents were already vaccine-eligible (i.e., aged 16-17 years) reported their adolescent had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose, similar to the proportion reported by vaccine-eligible adolescents aged 16-17 years (26.1%). However, vaccine receipt reported by parents of adolescents differed across demographic groups; parents identifying as female or Hispanic, or who had an education lower than a bachelor's degree reported the lowest adolescent COVID-19 vaccination receipt. Among parents of unvaccinated adolescents aged 12-17 years, 55.5% reported they would "definitely" or "probably" have their adolescent receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Among unvaccinated adolescents aged 13-17 years, 51.7% reported they would "definitely" or "probably" receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Obtaining more information about adolescent COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy, as well as school COVID-19 vaccination requirements, were the most commonly reported factors that would increase vaccination intentions among both parents and adolescents. Federal, state, and local health officials and primary care professionals were the most trusted sources of COVID-19 vaccine information among both groups. Efforts focusing on clearly communicating to the public the benefits and safety of COVID-19 vaccination for adolescents, particularly by health care professionals, could help increase confidence in adolescent COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination coverage.

Quality of Care for Youth Hospitalized for Suicidal Ideation and Self-Harm.

OBJECTIVE: To examine performance on quality measures for pediatric inpatient suicidal ideation/self-harm care, and whether performance is associated with reutilization. METHODS: Retrospective observational 8 hospital study of patients [N = 1090] aged 5 to 17 years hospitalized for suicidal ideation/self-harm between 9/1/14 and 8/31/16. Two medical records-based quality measures assessing suicidal ideation/self-harm care were evaluated, one on counseling caregivers regarding restricting access to lethal means and the other on communication between inpatient and outpatient providers regarding the follow-up plan. Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between quality measure scores and 1) hospital site, 2) patient demographics, and 3) 30-day emergency department return visits and inpatient readmissions. RESULTS: Medical record documentation revealed that, depending on hospital site, 17% to 98% of caregivers received lethal means restriction counseling (mean 70%); inpatient-to-outpatient provider communication was documented in 0% to 51% of cases (mean 16%). The odds of documenting receipt of lethal means restriction counseling was higher for caregivers of female patients compared to caregivers of male patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.14). The odds of documenting inpatient-to-outpatient provider follow-up plan communication was lower for Black patients compared to White patients (aOR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.24-0.84). All-cause 30-day readmission was lower for patients with documented caregiver receipt of lethal means restriction counseling (aOR 0.48, 95% CI, 0.28-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed disparities and deficits in the quality of care received by youth with suicidal ideation/self-harm. Providing caregivers lethal means restriction counseling prior to discharge may help to prevent readmission.

Comparing covariation among vaccine hesitancy and broader beliefs within Twitter and survey data.

Over the past decade, the percentage of adults in the United States who use some form of social media has roughly doubled, increasing from 36 percent in early 2009 to 72 percent in 2019. There has been a corresponding increase in research aimed at understanding opinions and beliefs that are expressed online. However, the generalizability of findings from social media research is a subject of ongoing debate. Social media platforms are conduits of both information and misinformation about vaccines and vaccine hesitancy. Our research objective was to examine whether we can draw similar conclusions from Twitter and national survey data about the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and a broader set of beliefs. In 2018 we conducted a nationally representative survey of parents in the United States informed by a literature review to ask their views on a range of topics, including vaccine side effects, conspiracy theories, and understanding of science. We developed a set of keyword-based queries corresponding to each of the belief items from the survey and pulled matching tweets from 2017. We performed the data pull of the most recent full year of data in 2018. Our primary measures of belief covariation were the loadings and scores of the first principal components obtained using principal component analysis (PCA) from the two sources. We found that, after using manually coded weblinks in tweets to infer stance, there was good qualitative agreement between the first principal component loadings and scores using survey and Twitter data. This held true after we took the additional processing step of resampling the Twitter data based on the number of topics that an individual tweeted about, as a means of correcting for differential representation for elicited (survey) vs. volunteered (Twitter) beliefs. Overall, the results show that analyses using Twitter data may be generalizable in certain contexts, such as assessing belief covariation.

The Stability of Influenza Vaccination Behavior Over Time: A Longitudinal Analysis of Individuals Across 8 Years.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza vaccination is an important behavior with significant individual and public health consequences, yet fewer than half of individuals in the USA are vaccinated annually. To promote vaccination adherence, it is important to understand the factors that affect vaccination behavior. PURPOSE: In this research, we focused on one such factor, an individual's vaccination history. We gathered longitudinal data to track and understand the relationship between an individual's vaccination history and their current behaviors. METHODS: U.S. adults completed multiple surveys over an 8 year period, which asked about whether they had received the influenza vaccination during the previous flu season. We analyzed the data to determine the strength of the relationship between vaccination decisions across single-year and multiyear intervals. Additionally, we fitted two mathematical models to the data to determine whether individuals were better characterized as having a stable propensity to vaccinate or a stable propensity to repeat their previous decisions. RESULTS: Individuals exhibited highly consistent behavior across adjacent years, yet, across the complete extent of the longitudinal study, they were far more likely to repeat the earlier decision to vaccinate. Surprisingly, the results of the mathematical model suggest that individuals are better characterized as having a stable propensity to repeat their previous decisions rather than a stable propensity to vaccinate per se. Although most individuals had an extremely strong tendency to repeat the previous decision, some had a far weaker propensity to do so. CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that interventions intended to increase vaccination uptake might be most impactful for those individuals with only a weak tendency to vaccinate or not to vaccinate.

Antibiotic Prescribing During Pediatric Direct-to-Consumer Telemedicine Visits.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Use of commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine outside of the pediatric medical home is increasing among children, and acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are the most commonly diagnosed condition at DTC telemedicine visits. Our objective was to compare the quality of antibiotic prescribing for ARIs among children across 3 settings: DTC telemedicine, urgent care, and the primary care provider (PCP) office. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study using 2015-2016 claims data from a large national commercial health plan, we identified ARI visits by children (0-17 years old), excluding visits with comorbidities that could affect antibiotic decisions. Visits were matched on age, sex, chronic medical complexity, state, rurality, health plan type, and ARI diagnosis category. Within the matched sample, we compared the percentage of ARI visits with any antibiotic prescribing and the percentage of ARI visits with guideline-concordant antibiotic management. RESULTS: There were 4604 DTC telemedicine, 38 408 urgent care, and 485 201 PCP visits for ARIs in the matched sample. Antibiotic prescribing was higher for DTC telemedicine visits than for other settings (52% of DTC telemedicine visits versus 42% urgent care and 31% PCP visits; P < .001 for both comparisons). Guideline-concordant antibiotic management was lower at DTC telemedicine visits than at other settings (59% of DTC telemedicine visits versus 67% urgent care and 78% PCP visits; P < .001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: At DTC telemedicine visits, children with ARIs were more likely to receive antibiotics and less likely to receive guideline-concordant antibiotic management compared to children at PCP visits and urgent care visits.

Hospital-Based Quality Measures for Pediatric Mental Health Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with a primary mental health condition account for nearly 10% of pediatric hospitalizations nationally, but little is known about the quality of care provided for them in hospital settings. Our objective was to develop and test medical record-based measures used to assess quality of pediatric mental health care in the emergency department (ED) and inpatient settings. METHODS: We drafted an evidence-based set of pediatric mental health care quality measures for the ED and inpatient settings. We used the modified Delphi method to prioritize measures; 2 ED and 6 inpatient measures were operationalized and field-tested in 2 community and 3 children's hospitals. Eligible patients were 5 to 19 years old and diagnosed with psychosis, suicidality, or substance use from January 2012 to December 2013. We used bivariate and multivariate models to examine measure performance by patient characteristics and by hospital. RESULTS: Eight hundred and seventeen records were abstracted with primary diagnoses of suicidality (n = 446), psychosis (n = 321), and substance use (n = 50). Performance varied across measures. Among patients with suicidality, male patients (adjusted odds ratio: 0.27, P < .001) and African American patients (adjusted odds ratio: 0.31, P = .02) were less likely to have documentation of caregiver counseling on lethal means restriction. Among admitted suicidal patients, 27% had documentation of communication with an outside provider, with variation across hospitals (0%-38%; P < .001). There was low overall performance on screening for comorbid substance abuse in ED patients with psychosis (mean: 30.3). CONCLUSIONS: These new pediatric mental health care quality measures were used to identify sex and race disparities and substantial hospital variation. These measures may be useful for assessing and improving hospital-based pediatric mental health care quality.