Evaluation of a Guided Nature and Forest Therapy Walk for Internal Medical Residents - A Brief Report.

Background: Medical residents commonly face compassion fatigue, burnout, anxiety, and depression. Studies of nature-based interventions show improved mental and physical health; few focus on healthcare providers. Objective: To explore potential benefits of forest bathing for medical residents' wellbeing. Methods: Using the Association of Nature and Forest Therapy's framework, we piloted a forest bathing intervention among medical residents with pre/post-participation surveys assessing perceptions of mindfulness and psychological wellbeing. Responses were analyzed using a Fisher's exact test and Student's t-test for independent samples. Results: Fourteen of fifteen participants completed both surveys. We observed significantly improved mindfulness scores and expressions of feeling calm, vital, or creative, as well as a decreased sense of anxiety and depression. Nonsignificant trends towards decreased burnout and irritability were seen. Conclusion: This quality improvement pilot demonstrates trends that forest bathing can improve medical residents' psychological wellbeing and mindfulness. Further exploration of this intervention for healthcare providers is warranted.

Implementation of Collection of Patients' Disability Status by Centralized Scheduling.

BACKGROUND: Collection of disability status in electronic health records (EHRs) is critical to addressing the significant health care disparities experienced by patients with disabilities. Despite this, little evidence exists to inform implementation. METHODS: This pilot trial evaluated the implementation of collection of patients' disability status during primary care new patient registration by centralized call center staff. The study took place over six weeks at an academic hospital system in Colorado. Staff received a 30-minute training on how to ask and document disability status in the EHR. Completion rate of collection, fidelity, and concordance were assessed through chart reviews and recordings of patient registration calls. Focus groups with staff and phone interviews with patients assessed the experience of including disability screeners in patient registration. RESULTS: A total of 3,673 new patients were registered at one of the 53 primary care clinics during the study period. Completion of disability status in the EHR increased from 9.5% at baseline to 53.5% by the last week of the trial, which was then maintained for eight weeks. Challenges were identified in the recorded calls with fidelity of if and how the questions were asked. No patient complaints were reported, and patients reported no concerns regarding collection of disability status during interviews. CONCLUSION: Documenting disability status during patient registration was effective and was not concerning to patients. To make initial steps to providing equitable care, efforts should be made to implement this type of screening universally across the clinical encounter.

Predictors of Receipt of Clinical Preventive Services in Adolescents and Adults with Down Syndrome Accessing Medicaid.

BACKGROUND: Persons with Down syndrome (DS) require preventive care that addresses their age-/gender- and syndrome-specific needs. Yet, adolescents and adults with DS do not receive these preventive care services as recommended. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To identify factors that predict receipt of age-/gender- and syndrome-specific preventive healthcare among adolescents and adults with DS. We hypothesized that more healthcare encounters and greater medical complexity would increase receipt of preventive care due to more opportunities to complete these activities. METHODS: Using Medicaid claims (2006-2010) for California, Colorado, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adolescents and adults with DS (≥12 years old). We modeled receipt of both ≥1 wellness examination and ≥1 thyroid function test (TFT) in 2009-2010 as a function of receipt of those same healthcare activities in 2006-08, adjusting for demographics, key comorbidities, and medical complexity using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: In this cohort of 3487 adolescents and adults with DS accessing Medicaid, 17% received both ≥1 wellness examination and ≥1 TFT in 2006-2008, 15% in 2009-2010, and only 7% during both time periods. Despite medical complexity and frequent healthcare interactions, the best predictor of future receipt of these activities was past receipt. State of residence variably impacted receipt of these preventive activities. CONCLUSIONS: Although past receipt of wellness examination and TFT was the best predictor of future receipt of these activities, overall rates were quite low in this cohort of adolescents and adults with DS. Further work is needed to improve preventive healthcare delivery to this vulnerable population.

Low Rates of Preventive Healthcare Service Utilization Among Adolescents and Adults With Down Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: People with Down syndrome have health risks that require specific lifelong preventive health care. With increasing life expectancy, people with Down syndrome also face health conditions typical of their unaffected peers and thus need coordinated health care. The purpose of this study is to describe rates of age/sex- and Down syndrome-specific preventive healthcare activities among adolescents and adults with Down syndrome. METHODS: Using Medicaid claims (2006-2010) in California, Colorado, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, the cohort was defined as people with Down syndrome aged ≥12 years seen by primary care providers and enrolled in Medicaid for ≥45 of 60 months without dual Medicare enrollment (n=3,501). Age focus-consistent primary care providers were defined as having a focus concordant with a patient's age: 12-17 years, child or mixed-focus; ≥26 years, adult or mixed-focus; 18-25 years, any focus. Differences in healthcare activities were evaluated using Pearson's chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Analyses were performed in 2015-2017. RESULTS: Of the cohort, 79% had an age focus-consistent primary care provider. However, 40% of adults aged ≥26 years received care from a child-focused primary care provider. Only 43% with an age focus-consistent provider had ≥1 well examination (age focus-inconsistent primary care provider: 35%, p<0.001). Most preventive activities had poor rates (<50%) regardless of age focus consistency between provider and patient age or whether they were age/sex- or Down syndrome-specific (well examinations; vaccinations; sleep apnea; hearing; and breast, cervical, and colon cancer screenings). Lipids, vision, and thyroid screenings reached moderate levels (50% to <80%). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of age/sex- and Down syndrome-specific preventive recommendations were low among adolescents and adults with Down syndrome, regardless of the age focus consistency of their primary care provider. This represents a significant opportunity to improve primary care in this vulnerable population.

Adults with Communication Disabilities Experience Poorer Health and Healthcare Outcomes Compared to Persons Without Communication Disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Persons with speech, language, and/or voice disabilities (collectively referred to as communication disabilities (CD)) represent 10% of the US population, yet their healthcare outcomes have not been described. Generally, research shows that persons with disabilities have poorer health and healthcare outcomes than their non-disabled peers. OBJECTIVES: To examine the health and healthcare outcomes of persons with CD compared to persons without CD. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of the 2012 National Health Interview Survey, which contained the first supplemental questions on CD. We compared proportional differences in outcomes; logistic and ordered logistic regression assessed the outcome measures across CD categories, controlling for demographics, non-communication disabilities, and chronic conditions. Findings are weighted to permit national inferences. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥ 18 years old) were divided into 4 mutually exclusive groups: people with voice disabilities only; speech/language disabilities only; speech/language and voice disabilities; and people without CD. MAIN MEASURES: Chronic health conditions; self-rated health; access to care; unmet needs for care; healthcare utilization. KEY RESULTS: Adults with CD more frequently had ≥ 1 chronic condition (voice 67.9%, speech/language 68.6%, speech/language and voice 79.9%, no CD 50.1%, p < 0.001) and reported fair/poor health (voice 19.5%, speech/language 32.5%, speech/language and voice 48.3%, no CD 11.2%, p < 0.001) compared to those without CD. Adults with CD more frequently utilized healthcare compared to those without CD. However, persons with CD endorsed greater difficulties accessing care than those without CD, including identifying a usual source of care, trouble finding a physician, and delaying or foregoing care (e.g., delayed due to availability of care: voice 26.1%, speech/language 37.2%, speech/language and voice 30.8% no CD 16.1%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Persons with CD are medically complex and experience greater challenges accessing healthcare than persons without CD. Healthcare providers need support and tools to provide equitable care that addresses the medical needs of persons with CD.

Low bone mineral density risk factors and testing patterns in institutionalized adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual or developmental disability (ID/DD) have multiple risks for low bone mineral density (BMD) without formal guidelines to guide testing. We sought to identify risk factors and patterns of BMD testing among institutionalized adults with ID/DD. METHODS: We evaluated risk factors for low BMD (Z-/T-score < -1) and patterns of BMD testing among adults with ID/DD receiving care at a state-run residential facility. Kruskal-Wallis, Fisher's exact and Pearson's chi-squared tests were used as appropriate. RESULTS: Of the 140 eligible patients, only 44% ever had BMD testing of which 89% had low BMD. Median age at diagnosis was 42 years old. Individuals with low BMD were more likely to be older, non-weight bearing, Caucasian and have severe cognitive delay. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with ID/DD in this facility had a high prevalence of low BMD. Further studies are needed to better characterize risk factors and inform screening within this high-risk population.

Greater risk of hospitalization in children with Down syndrome and OSA at higher elevation.

BACKGROUND: Children with Down syndrome (DS) are at high risk for OSA. Increasing elevation is known to exacerbate underlying respiratory disorders and worsen sleep quality in people without DS, but whether altitude modulates the severity of OSA in DS is uncertain. In this study, we evaluate the impact of elevation (≤ 1,500 m vs > 1,500 m) on the proportion of hospitalizations involving OSA in children with and without DS. METHODS: Merging the 2009 Kids' Inpatient Database with zip-code linked elevation data, we analyzed differences in the proportion of pediatric hospitalizations (ages 2-20 years) involving OSA, pneumonia, and congenital heart disease (CHD), with and without DS. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association of elevation with hospitalizations involving OSA and DS, adjusting for key comorbidities. RESULTS: Proportionately more DS encounters involved OSA, CHD, and pneumonia within each elevation category than non-DS encounters. However, the risk difference for hospitalizations involving OSA and DS increased disproportionately at higher elevations (DS: 16.2% [95% CI, 9.2%-23.2%]; non-DS: 0.1% [95% CI, -0.4% to 0.7%]). Multivariable estimates of relative risk indicate increased risk for hospitalization involving OSA at higher elevations for people with DS and in children aged 2 to 4 years or with two or more chronic conditions. CONCLUSIONS: At elevations > 1,500 m, children with DS and OSA have a disproportionately higher risk for hospitalization than children with OSA without DS. This finding has not been described previously. With further validation, this finding suggests the need for greater awareness and earlier screening for OSA and its complications in patients with DS living at higher elevations.

Fidelity of administrative data when researching Down syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the fidelity of administrative data with clinical data when researching Down syndrome (DS). METHODS: From outpatient, inpatient, and emergency department administrative claims within our institution, we identified 252 patients aged 18-45 years with encounters coded for DS by the ICD9=758.0 from 2000 to 2008. We evaluated these cases for false-positive errors-cases in which DS was not actually present in clinical descriptions. Subsequently, we identified false-negative errors (cases in which DS was present without encounters coded as such) by examination of the medical records for all patients within our study frame who had one of several common DS comorbidities, including congenital heart disease, hypothyroidism, and atlantoaxial instability. RESULTS: Among the 252 people with an administrative code for DS, 53 (21%) did not have DS documented in their medical record (false-positive error). While searching for false-negative errors, 29 additional patients were discovered with DS documented in the medical record who had not been previously identified. This led to a final cohort of 228 patients with DS. The presence of a billing code for DS had moderate sensitivity (87%) and positive predictive value (79%), but high specificity (99.9%). DISCUSSION: Administrative claims misclassify a sizeable proportion of patients with DS. Judgments about quality of care on the basis of samples identified using administrative claims may not accurately reflect the experience of patients with the conditions in question. When using administrative databases to study the quality of care for patients with DS, diagnostic verification within the clinical record is advisable whenever possible.

Current estimate of Down Syndrome population prevalence in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To calculate a reliable estimate of the population prevalence of Down syndrome in the US. STUDY DESIGN: The annual number of births of infants with Down syndrome were estimated by applying published birth prevalence rates of Down syndrome by maternal age to US data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the years for which births by maternal age were available (1940-2008). Death certificate data for persons with Down syndrome were available for the years 1968-2007. We estimated the number of people with Down syndrome on January 1, 2008, using a life table approach based on proportions of deaths by age. Monte Carlo sampling was used to create 90% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for our estimates. RESULTS: We estimated the January 1, 2008, population prevalence of Down syndrome as approximately 250700 (90% UI, 185900-321700) based on proportions of deaths by age from the most recent 2 years (2006-2007) of death certificate data. This estimate corresponds to a prevalence of 8.27 people with Down syndrome per 10000 population (90% UI, 6.14-10.62). CONCLUSION: Our estimate of Down syndrome prevalence is roughly 25%-40% lower than estimates based solely on current birth prevalence. The results presented here can be considered a starting point for facilitating policy and services planning for persons with Down syndrome.