Evaluation of the Predictive Value of Routinely Collected Health-Related Social Needs Measures.

The objective was to assess the value of routinely collected patient-reported health-related social needs (HRSNs) measures for predicting utilization and health outcomes. The authors identified Mayo Clinic patients with cancer, diabetes, or heart failure. The HRSN measures were collected as part of patient-reported screenings from June to December 2019 and outcomes (hospitalization, 30-day readmission, and death) were ascertained in 2020. For each outcome and disease combination, 4 models were used: gradient boosting machine (GBM), random forest (RF), generalized linear model (GLM), and elastic net (EN). Other predictors included clinical factors, demographics, and area-based HRSN measures-area deprivation index (ADI) and rurality. Predictive performance for models was evaluated with and without the routinely collected HRSN measures as change in area under the curve (AUC). Variable importance was also assessed. The differences in AUC were mixed. Significant improvements existed in 3 models of death for cancer (GBM: 0.0421, RF: 0.0496, EN: 0.0428), 3 models of hospitalization (GBM: 0.0372, RF: 0.0640, EN: 0.0441), and 1 of death (RF: 0.0754) for diabetes, and 1 model of readmissions (GBM: 0.1817), and 3 models of death (GBM: 0.0333, RF: 0.0519, GLM: 0.0489) for heart failure. Age, ADI, and the Charlson comorbidity index were the top 3 in variable importance and were consistently more important than routinely collected HRSN measures. The addition of routinely collected HRSN measures resulted in mixed improvement in the predictive performance of the models. These findings suggest that existing factors and the ADI are more important for prediction in these contexts. More work is needed to identify predictors that consistently improve model performance.

Realtime Diagnosis from Electrocardiogram Artificial Intelligence-Guided Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with Long Follow-Up (REGAL): Rationale and design of a pragmatic, decentralized, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased risks of stroke and dementia. Early diagnosis and treatment could reduce the disease burden, but AF is often undiagnosed. An artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm has been shown to identify patients with previously unrecognized AF; however, monitoring these high-risk patients has been challenging. Consumer wearable devices could be an alternative to enable long-term follow-up. OBJECTIVES: To test whether Apple Watch, used as a long-term monitoring device, can enable early diagnosis of AF in patients who were identified as having high risk based on AI-ECG. DESIGN: The Realtime diagnosis from Electrocardiogram (ECG) Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Guided Screening for Atrial Fibrillation (AF) with Long Follow-up (REGAL) study is a pragmatic trial that will accrue up to 2,000 older adults with a high likelihood of unrecognized AF determined by AI-ECG to reach our target of 1,420 completed participants. Participants will be 1:1 randomized to intervention or control and will be followed up for 2 years. Patients in the intervention arm will receive or use their existing Apple Watch and iPhone and record a 30-second ECG using the watch routinely or if an abnormal heart rate notification is prompted. The primary outcome is newly diagnosed AF. Secondary outcomes include changes in cognitive function, stroke, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. The trial will utilize a pragmatic, digitally-enabled, decentralized design to allow patients to consent and receive follow-up remotely without traveling to the study sites. SUMMARY: The REGAL trial will examine whether a consumer wearable device can serve as a long-term monitoring approach in older adults to detect AF and prevent cognitive function decline. If successful, the approach could have significant implications on how future clinical practice can leverage consumer devices for early diagnosis and disease prevention. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: : NCT05923359.

Why U.S. Patients Declined Hospital-at-Home during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency: An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study.

To understand why US patients refused participation in hospital-at-home (H@H) during the coronavirus disease 2019 Public Health Emergency, eligible adult patients seen at 2 Mayo Clinic sites, Mayo Clinic Health System-Northwest Wisconsin region (NWWI) and Mayo Clinic Florida (MCF), from August 2021 through March 2022, were invited to participate in a convergent-parallel study. Quantitative associations between H@H participation status and patient baseline data at hospital admission were investigated. H@H patients were more likely to have a Mayo Clinic patient portal at baseline (P-value: .014), indicating a familiarity with telehealth. Patients who refused were more likely to be from NWWI (P-value < .001) and have a higher Epic Deterioration Index score (P-value: .004). The groups also had different quarters (in terms of fiscal calendar) of admission (P-value: .040). Analyzing qualitative interviews (n = 13) about refusal reasons, 2 themes portraying the quantitative associations emerged: lack of clarity about H@H and perceived domestic challenges. To improve access to H@H and increase patient recruitment, improved education about the dynamics of H@H, for both hospital staff and patients, and inclusive strategies for navigating domestic barriers and diagnostic challenges are needed.

Time to first treatment is an independent prognostic factor for Multiple Myeloma (MM).

INTRODUCTION: Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable plasma cell neoplasm. In this study, we aimed to analyze the impact of time to initiation of systemic therapy for MM on overall survival (OS). METHODS: We identified cases diagnosed with MM from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2013. RESULTS: A total of 38,178 MM patients were included in the analysis. The median time to systemic therapy in our cohort was 17 days (range 0-120). The median OS for patients who initiated therapy > 30-days after diagnosis was longer than those who received it ≤ 7 days (46 vs. 27-month, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients who received treatment ≤ 7 days from diagnosis had worse mortality compared with those receiving treatment > 30 days (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4-1.6). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, time to initiation of systemic therapy was an independent prognostic factor in MM. Similar to other lymphoid malignancies, this metric may be a surrogate for high-risk disease in MM, and future trials may need to investigate time-to-treatment as a factor to allow enrollment of potentially sick patients.

Effect of hospital-at-home vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill adults: study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delivering acute hospital care to patients at home might reduce costs and improve patient experience. Mayo Clinic's Advanced Care at Home (ACH) program is a novel virtual hybrid model of "Hospital at Home." This pragmatic randomized controlled non-inferiority trial aims to compare two acute care delivery models: ACH vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill patients. METHODS: We aim to enroll 360 acutely ill adult patients (≥18 years) who are admitted to three hospitals in Arizona, Florida, and Wisconsin, two of which are academic medical centers and one is a community-based practice. The eligibility criteria will follow what is used in routine practice determined by local clinical teams, including clinical stability, social stability, health insurance plans, and zip codes. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to ACH or traditional inpatient care, stratified by site. The primary outcome is a composite outcome of all-cause mortality and 30-day readmission. Secondary outcomes include individual outcomes in the composite endpoint, fall with injury, medication errors, emergency room visit, transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), cost, the number of days alive out of hospital, and patient-reported quality of life. A mixed-methods study will be conducted with patients, clinicians, and other staff to investigate their experience. DISCUSSION: The pragmatic trial will examine a novel virtual hybrid model for delivering high-acuity medical care at home. The findings will inform patient selection and future large-scale implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05212077. Registered on 27 January 2022.