Screening for Unhealthy Alcohol Use Among Patients With Multiple Chronic Conditions in Primary Care.

Introduction: Unhealthy alcohol use increases the risk for and exacerbation of chronic health conditions. As such, screening, prevention, and management of unhealthy alcohol use is especially critical to improving health outcomes for patients with multiple chronic health conditions. It is unclear to what extent multiple chronic condition status is a barrier to screening for unhealthy alcohol use in the primary care setting. The authors hypothesized that patients with multiple chronic conditions would be at lower odds of being screened for unhealthy alcohol use than patients without multiple chronic conditions. Methods: The authors performed a secondary analysis of electronic health record data for patients from 67 primary care practices in Virginia (2020-2023). Using the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services' chronic disease framework, they classified patients by multiple chronic condition status: no multiple chronic conditions, physical multiple chronic conditions, mental health multiple chronic conditions, and physical and mental health multiple chronic conditions. They used multiple logistic regressions with an added practice-level random effect to analyze the relationship between multiple chronic condition status and the odds of receiving an alcohol-related assessment, of being screened for unhealthy alcohol use with a U.S. Preventive Services Task Force-recommended instrument, and of screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use within the past 2 years. Results: Within a final cohort of n=11,789, a total of 6,796 patients (58%) had multiple chronic conditions (29% physical multiple chronic conditions, 4% mental health multiple chronic conditions, and 25% physical and mental health multiple chronic conditions). In all, 69% of patients were screened for unhealthy alcohol use, whereas 16% were screened with a U.S. Preventive Services Task Force-recommended instrument, and 7% screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use. Patients with physical and mental health multiple chronic conditions had 0.9 times lower odds of receiving any screening for unhealthy alcohol use than those with no multiple chronic conditions (95% CI=0.8, 1.0; p=0.0240), whereas patients with only physical multiple chronic conditions or only mental health multiple chronic conditions had similar odds. There was no difference in the odds of being screened with a U.S. Preventive Services Task Force-recommended instrument on the basis of multiple chronic condition status. Patients with mental health multiple chronic conditions and physical and mental health multiple chronic conditions had 1.8 and 1.5 times greater odds of screening positive for unhealthy alcohol use, respectively (95% CI=1.3, 2.7; p=0.0014 and 95% CI=1.2, 1.8; p=0.0003). Conclusions: Although patients with chronic mental health conditions were more likely to screen positive for unhealthy alcohol use than patients without multiple chronic conditions, Virginia primary care patients with physical and mental health multiple chronic conditions were less likely to receive an alcohol-related assessment during the past 2 years. Given the overall modest rate of screening with a U.S. Preventive Services Task Force-recommended instrument, further efforts are needed to create the conditions for high-quality alcohol-related preventive service delivery in primary care, particularly for patients with high complexity and/or mental health conditions.

Reducing low-value care is a feasible approach to enhancing access and affordability of high-value care for older Americans.

The authors advocate for a strategy that reallocates the substantial workforce effort and financial resources currently devoted to low-value care to enhance access and affordability of high-value services.

Scoping review of interventions to de-implement potentially harmful non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in healthcare settings.

OBJECTIVES: Potentially harmful non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) utilisation persists at undesirable rates worldwide. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings and to suggest directions for future research. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central and Google Scholar (1 January 2000 to 31 May 2022). STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting on the effectiveness of interventions to systematically reduce potentially harmful NSAID utilisation in healthcare settings. DATA EXTRACTION: Using Covidence systematic review software, we extracted study and intervention characteristics, including the effectiveness of interventions in reducing NSAID utilisation. RESULTS: From 7818 articles initially identified, 68 were included in the review. Most studies took place in European countries (45.6%) or the USA (35.3%), with randomised controlled trial as the most common design (55.9%). Interventions were largely clinician-facing (76.2%) and delivered in primary care (60.2%) but were rarely (14.9%) guided by an implementation model, framework or theory. Academic detailing, clinical decision support or electronic medical record interventions, performance reports and pharmacist review were frequent approaches employed. NSAID use was most commonly classified as potentially harmful based on patients' age (55.8%), history of gastrointestinal disorders (47.1%), or history of kidney disease (38.2%). Only 7.4% of interventions focused on over-the-counter (OTC) NSAIDs in addition to prescription. The majority of studies (76.2%) reported a reduction in the utilisation of potentially harmful NSAIDs. Few studies (5.9%) evaluated pain or quality of life following NSAIDs discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Many varied interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs have been applied in healthcare settings worldwide. Based on these findings and identified knowledge gaps, further efforts to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of interventions and the combination of intervention characteristics associated with effective de-implementation are needed. In addition, future work should be guided by de-implementation theory, focus on OTC NSAIDs and incorporate patient-focused strategies and outcomes, including the evaluation of unintended consequences of the intervention.

Considering the Environmental Impact of Practice-Based Research.

INTRODUCTION: Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) improve primary care by addressing issues that matter to clinicians. Building trust between researchers and care teams is essential to this process, which often requires visiting practices to cultivate relationships and perform research activities. However, in a recent study using practice facilitation to improve the delivery of a preventive service, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted us to convert all planned facilitation from an in-person to virtual format. This eliminated the need to commute by automobile to and from practices across the state, greatly reducing the carbon footprint of the study. METHODS: From practice facilitator field notes that detailed practice locations and number of sessions, we calculated the total number of driving miles averted by virtual facilitation. We then determined metric tons of carbon dioxide we avoided producing using the Environmental Protection Agency Greenhouse Gases Equivalencies Calculator. During post-intervention interviews, we assessed practices' perspectives and experiences with the virtual format. RESULTS: Three practice facilitators provided an average of 3.4 sessions for 64 practices. Virtual facilitation averted 32,574.8 drive miles and prevented the release of 12.7 metric tons of carbon dioxide, an offset equivalent to growing 210 trees for 10 years. Practices reported that virtual facilitation fostered greater engagement and allowed more clinicians and staff to attend sessions. DISCUSSION: Climate change poses a significant threat to the health of people and communities. Given their commitment to improving population health, it may be time for PBRNs to routinely assess their environmental impact and minimize preventable environmental costs.

Long-Chain Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation and Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage: EPA or DHA?

PURPOSE: Long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) may enhance recovery from exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD). However, it is unclear if the effects are due to EPA, DHA, or both. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the effect of EPA + DHA, EPA, and DHA compared with placebo (PL) on muscular recovery. METHODS: Thirty males were randomized to 4 g·d -1 EPA + DHA ( n = 8), EPA ( n = 8), DHA ( n = 7), or PL ( n = 7). After 7-wk supplementation, a downhill running (20 min, 70% V̇O 2max , -16% gradient) plus jumping lunges (5 × 20 reps, 2-min rest intervals) muscle damage protocol was performed. Indices of muscle damage, soreness, muscle function, and inflammation were measured at baseline and throughout recovery. The omega-3 index (O3i; %EPA + %DHA in erythrocytes) was used to track tissue EPA and DHA status. RESULTS: After supplementation, the O3i was significantly higher than PL in all experimental groups ( P < 0.001). Leg press performance was lower in the PL group at 24 h compared with EPA ( P = 0 .019) and at 72 h for EPA ( P = 0.004) and DHA ( P = 0 .046). Compared with PL, muscle soreness was lower in the DHA ( P = 0.015) and EPA ( P = 0.027) groups at 48 h. Albeit nonsignificant, EPA + DHA tended to attenuate muscle soreness ( d = 1.37) and leg strength decrements ( d = 0.75) compared with PL. Jump performance and power metrics improved more rapidly in the EPA and DHA groups (time effects: P < 0.001). Measures of inflammation, range of motion, and muscle swelling were similar between groups ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with PL, 4 g·d -1 of EPA or DHA for 52 d improves certain aspects of recovery from EIMD. EPA + DHA did not clearly enhance recovery. Equivalent dosing of EPA + DHA may blunt the performance effects observed in EPA or DHA alone.

A Scoping Review of Interventions to De-implement Potentially Harmful Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) in Healthcare Settings.

Objectives: Potentially harmful nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) utilization persists at undesirable rates throughout the world. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings and to suggest directions for future research. Design: Scoping review. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar (2000-2022). Study Selection: Studies reporting on the effectiveness of interventions to systematically reduce potentially harmful NSAID utilization in healthcare settings. Data Extraction: Using Covidence systematic review software, we extracted study and intervention characteristics, including the effectiveness of interventions in reducing NSAID utilization. Results: From 7,818 articles initially identified, 68 were included in the review. Most studies took place in European countries (45.6%) or the U.S. (35.3%), with randomized controlled trial as the most common design (55.9%). The majority of studies (76.2%) reported a reduction in the utilization of potentially harmful NSAIDs. Interventions were largely clinician-facing (76.2%) and delivered in primary care (60.2%). Academic detailing, clinical decision support or electronic medical record interventions, performance reports, and pharmacist review were frequent approaches employed. NSAID use was most commonly classified as potentially harmful based on patients' age (55.8%) or history of gastrointestinal disorders (47.1%) or kidney disease (38.2%). Only 7.4% of interventions focused on over-the-counter NSAIDs in addition to prescription. Few studies (5.9%) evaluated pain or quality of life following NSAIDs discontinuation. Conclusion: Many varied interventions are effective in de-implementing potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings. Efforts to adapt, scale, and disseminate these interventions are needed. In addition, future interventions should address over-the-counter NSAIDs, which are broadly available and widely used. Evaluating unintended consequences of interventions, including patient-focused outcomes, is another important priority.

A "sludge audit" for health system colorectal cancer screening services.

OBJECTIVES: "Sludge," or the frictions or administrative burdens that make it difficult for people to attain what they want or need, is an unexplored health care delivery factor that may contribute to deficiencies in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We piloted a method to identify and quantify sludge in a southeastern US health system's delivery of CRC screening services. STUDY DESIGN: Mixed methods sludge audit. METHODS: We collected and analyzed quantitative (insurance claims, electronic health record, and administrative files) and qualitative (stakeholder interviews and process observations) data associated with CRC screening for instances of sludge. Because they contribute to sludge and reduce system capacity for high-value screening, we also evaluated low-value CRC screening processes. RESULTS: Although specific results were likely amplified by effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the sludge audit revealed important areas for improvement. A 60.4% screening rate was observed. Approximately half of screening orders were not completed. The following categories of sludge were identified: communication, time, technology, administrative tasks, paperwork, and low-value care. For example, wait times for screening colonoscopy were substantial, duplicate orders were common, and some results were not accessible in the electronic health record. Of completed screenings, 32% were low-value and 38% were associated with low-value preoperative testing. There was evidence of a differential negative impact of sludge to vulnerable patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our sludge audit method identified and quantified multiple instances of sludge in a health system's CRC screening processes. Sludge audits can help organizations to systematically evaluate and reduce sludge for more effective and equitable CRC screening.

Use of population health data to promote equitable recruitment for a primary care practice implementation trial addressing unhealthy alcohol use.

Background: Recruiting underrepresented people and communities in research is essential for generalizable findings. Ensuring representative participants can be particularly challenging for practice-level dissemination and implementation trials. Novel use of real-world data about practices and the communities they serve could promote more equitable and inclusive recruitment. Methods: We used a comprehensive primary care clinician and practice database, the Virginia All-Payers Claims Database, and the HealthLandscape Virginia mapping tool with community-level socio-ecological information to prospectively inform practice recruitment for a study to help primary care better screen and counsel for unhealthy alcohol use. Throughout recruitment, we measured how similar study practices were to primary care on average, mapped where practices' patients lived, and iteratively adapted our recruitment strategies. Results: In response to practice and community data, we adapted our recruitment strategy three times; first leveraging relationships with residency graduates, then a health system and professional organization approach, followed by a community-targeted approach, and a concluding approach using all three approaches. We enrolled 76 practices whose patients live in 97.3% (1844 of 1907) of Virginia's census tracts. Our overall patient sample had similar demographics to the state for race (21.7% vs 20.0% Black), ethnicity (9.5% vs 10.2% Hispanic), insurance status (6.4% vs 8.0% uninsured), and education (26.0% vs 32.5% high school graduate or less). Each practice recruitment approach uniquely included different communities and patients. Discussion: Data about primary care practices and the communities they serve can prospectively inform research recruitment of practices to yield more representative and inclusive patient cohorts for participation.

Reallocating Cervical Cancer Preventive Service Spending from Low- to High-Value Clinical Scenarios.

Timely follow-up care after an abnormal cervical cancer screening test result is critical to the prevention and early diagnosis of cervical cancer. The current inadequate and inequitable delivery of these potentially life-saving services is attributed to several factors, including patient out-of-pocket costs. Waiving of consumer cost-sharing for follow-up testing (e.g., colposcopy and related cervical services) is likely to improve access and uptake, especially among underserved populations. One approach to defray the incremental costs of providing more generous coverage for follow-up testing is reducing expenditures on "low-value" cervical cancer screening services. To explore the potential fiscal implications of a policy that redirects cervical cancer screening resources from potentially low- to high-value clinical scenarios, we analyzed 2019 claims from the Virginia All-Payer Claims Database to quantify (i) total spending on low-value cervical cancer screening and (ii) out-of-pocket costs associated with colposcopy and related cervical services among commercially insured Virginians. In a cohort of 1,806,921 female patients (ages 48.1 ± 24.8 years), 295,193 claims for cervical cancer screening were reported, 100,567 (34.0%) of which were determined to be low-value ($4,394,361 total; $4,172,777 for payers and $221,584 out-of-pocket [$2/patient]). Claims for 52,369 colposcopy and related cervical services were reported ($40,994,016 total; $33,457,518 for payers and $7,536,498 out-of-pocket [$144/patient]). These findings suggest that reallocating savings incurred from unnecessary spending to fund more generous coverage of necessary follow-up care is a feasible approach to enhancing cervical cancer prevention equity and outcomes. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Out-of-pocket fees are a barrier to follow-up care after an abnormal cervical cancer screening test. Among commercially insured Virginians, out-of-pocket costs for follow-up services averaged $144/patient; 34% of cervical cancer screenings were classified as low value. Reallocating low-value cervical cancer screening expenditures to enhance coverage for follow-up care can improve screening outcomes. See related Spotlight, p. 363.

The influence of dietary and supplemental omega-3 fatty acids on the omega-3 index: A scoping review.

Introduction: The majority of the population do not consume adequate omega-3 fatty acids (n-3 FA), leading to global deficiencies, as evidenced by poor omega-3 status. An indicator of overall n-3 FA status, omega3-index (O3i) ≥8% has been associated with reduced risk of chronic disease, most notably cardiovascular disease. Thus, a synthesis of current research summarizing the effects of n-3 FA intake on O3i is warranted to develop and refine clinical recommendations. The purpose of this scoping review was to evaluate the effect of n-3 FA interventions and estimate sufficient n-3 FA intake to improve O3i to meet recommendations. Methods: Search criteria were human studies published in English from 2004 to 2022 that assessed O3i at baseline and following an n-3 FA intervention. Results: Fifty-eight studies that met inclusion criteria were identified. Protocols included fish consumption, fortified foods, combined eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplements, supplements of single n-3 FA (alpha linolenic acid (ALA), EPA, DHA, etc.), and supplements providing multiple n-3 FA. Dietary supplements varied in chemical composition; the most common were triglycerides or ethyl esters. The lowest supplementation protocol was 100 mg/d, and the largest was 4,400 mg/d EPA and DHA. Supplementation time period ranged from 3 weeks to 1 year. At baseline, three study samples had mean O3i >8%, although many intervention protocols successfully increased O3i. Discussion: Generally, the lowest doses shown to be effective in raising O3i to recommended levels were >1,000 mg/d of combination DHA plus EPA for 12 weeks or longer. Supplements composed of triglycerides were more bioavailable and thus more effective than other formulas. Based on the data evaluated, practical recommendations to improve O3i to ≥8% are consumption of 1,000-1,500 mg/d EPA plus DHA as triglycerides for at least 12 weeks.

Implementation of a Multimodal Heart Failure Management Protocol in a Skilled Nursing Facility.

Hospitals and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are incentivized to reduce hospital readmissions among patients with heart failure (HF). We used the RE-AIM framework and mixed quantitative and qualitative data to evaluate the implementation of a multimodal HF management protocol (HFMP) administered in a SNF in 2021. Over 90% of eligible patients were enrolled in the HFMP (REACH). Of the 42 enrolled patients (61.9% female, aged 81.9 ± 8.9 years, 9.5% Medicaid), 2 (4.8%) were readmitted within 30 days of hospital discharge and 4 (9.5%) were readmitted within 30 days of SNF discharge compared with historical (2020) rates of 16.7% and 22.2%, respectively (a potential savings of $132,418-$176,573 in hospital costs) (EFFECTIVENESS). Although stakeholder feedback about ADOPTION and IMPLEMENTATION was largely positive, challenges associated with clinical data collection, documentation, and staff turnover were described. Findings will inform refinement of the HFMP to facilitate further testing and sustainability (MAINTENANCE).

The Current State of Alcohol Screening and Management in Virginia Primary Care Practices: An Evaluation of Preventive Service Use.

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends screening and behavioral counseling for adults over 18 years for unhealthy alcohol use. Recommended screening instruments include the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Concise and or Single Alcohol Screening Question. Behavioral counseling is feasible in primary care, taking on average 30 minutes. Baseline data for a practice facilitation trial demonstrated clinicians appropriately screened only 10.8% of patients and only identified 9.6% as having risky drinking. Yet, 24% of patients reported risky drinking on a survey, demonstrating the implementation gap of the USPSTF recommendation and opportunity to improve health.

Does de-implementation of low-value care impact the patient-clinician relationship? A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: The importance of reducing low-value care (LVC) is increasingly recognized, but the impact of de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship is not well understood. This mixed-methods study explored the impact of LVC de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship. METHODS: Adult primary care patients from a large Virginia health system volunteered to participate in a survey (n = 232) or interview (n = 24). Participants completed the Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9) after reading a vignette about a clinician declining to provide a low-value service: antibiotics for acute sinusitis (LVC-antibiotics); screening EKG (LVC-EKG); screening vitamin D test (LVC-vitamin D); or an alternate vignette about a high-value service, and imagining that their own primary care clinician had acted in the same manner. A different sample of participants was asked to imagine that their own primary care clinician did not order LVC-antibiotics or LVC-EKG and then respond to semi-structured interview questions. Outcomes data included participant demographics, PDRQ-9 scores (higher score = greater relationship integrity), and content analysis of transcribed interviews. Differences in PDRQ-9 scores were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. Data were integrated for analysis and interpretation. RESULTS: Although participants generally agreed with the vignette narrative (not providing LVC), many demonstrated difficulty comprehending the broad concept of LVC and potential harms. The topic triggered memories of negative experiences with healthcare (typically poor-quality care, not necessarily LVC). The most common recommendation for reducing LVC was for patients to take greater responsibility for their own health. Most participants believed that their relationship with their clinician would not be negatively impacted by denial of LVC because they trusted their clinician's guidance. Participants emphasized that trusted clinicians are those who listen to them, spend time with them, and offer understandable advice. Some felt that not providing LVC would actually increase their trust in their clinician. Similar PDRQ-9 scores were observed for LVC-antibiotics (38.9), LVC-EKG (37.5), and the alternate vignette (36.4), but LVC-vitamin D was associated with a significantly lower score (31.2) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this vignette-based study, we observed minimal impact of LVC de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship, although service-specific differences surfaced. Further situation-based research is needed to confirm study findings.

Socializing the evidence for diabetes control to develop "Mindlines": A qualitative pilot study.

Context: Evidence on specific interventions to improve diabetes control in primary care is available, but this evidence is not always well-implemented. The concept of "mindlines" has been proposed to explain how clinicians integrate evidence using specifics of their practices and patients to produce knowledge-in-practice-in-context. Objective: We designed a pilot study to operationalize the "mindlines" concept by creating a venue for clinician-staff interaction concerning evidence. We attempted to hold "mindlines"-producing conversations in primary care practices about evidence to improve diabetes control. Study design and Analysis: Qualitative analysis of recordings of facilitated practice-wide conversations and field notes. Setting: 4 primary care practices in a health system in southwest Virginia. Population Studied: Clinicians, nurses, medical assistants, and clerical staff in primary care practices. Intervention: In each of four primary care practices in a single health system, we held a practice-wide conversation about a simple diabetes intervention model over a provided lunch. We attempted to keep the conversation relatively informal and encouraged participation from all. We recorded the conversations and took field notes. Outcome Measures: We analyzed the data using a framework adapted from the "mindlines" research and noted additional emerging themes. We also analyzed practice average proportions of controlled glycated hemoglobin levels in diabetic patients. Results: While most of the conversation concerned barriers to implementation of the simple diabetes intervention model, we noted examples of practices adopting and adapting the evidence to suit their own needs and context, consistent with the fundamentals of the "mindlines" model. Performance metrics regarding diabetes control for the four practices improved after the intervention. Conclusions: It appears that the type of conversations that "mindlines" research describes can be generated with facilitation around evidence, but further research is required to better understand the limitations and impact of this intervention.

An Association between Bioavailable 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and Bone Mineral Density in a Diverse Cohort of Collegiate Athletes.

INTRODUCTION: Although vitamin D is intimately involved in bone metabolism, the relationship between vitamin D status, as measured by serum total 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration, and bone mineral density (BMD) is weak, particularly in non-White populations. Measurement of bioavailable 25(OH)D has been suggested as a better indicator of vitamin D status than total 25(OH)D concentration. To date, the bioavailable 25(OH)D biomarker has been explored minimally in athletic populations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between total and bioavailable 25(OH)D concentrations and BMD in collegiate athletes. METHODS: NCAA Division I basketball and swimming athletes served as study participants (n = 53; 28 females, 25 males; 28 basketball players, 25 swimmers). All participants completed dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans for analysis of BMD, blood draws for vitamin D measures, and diet/lifestyle questionnaires. RESULTS: Overall, total 25(OH)D was 80.0 + 13.9 nmol·L-1 and bioavailable 25(OH)D was 6.0 ± 1.9 nmol·L-1. There was strong disagreement between total 25(OH)D and bioavailable 25(OH)D concentrations (κ = -0.299, r = -0.129) (P = 0.100); 53% of total participants and 77% of Black participants were classified differently (low vs normal vitamin D status) based on total and bioavailable 25(OH)D criteria. Black participants had significantly lower total 25(OH)D and higher bioavailable 25(OH)D concentrations than White participants (59.5 vs 102.5 nmol·L-1 and 7.9 vs 5.4 nmol·L-1, respectively) (P < 0.001). Total 25(OH)D and total BMD were not correlated, but bioavailable 25(OH)D and total BMD demonstrated a positive correlation (r = 0.618, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that bioavailable 25(OH)D concentration may be a better clinical measure of vitamin D status than total 25(OH)D as related to BMD in collegiate athletes, particularly in Black athletes. Further research on the utility of the bioavailable 25(OH)D biomarker in athletes is needed.

Examination of the Moderating Effect of Race on the Relationship between Vitamin D Status and COVID-19 Test Positivity Using Propensity Score Methods.

INTRODUCTION: With a well-established role in inflammation and immune function, vitamin D status has emerged as a potential factor for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the moderating effect of race on the relationship between vitamin D status and the risk of COVID-19 test positivity, and to compare propensity score (PS) model results to those obtained from classical bivariate and multivariable models, which have primarily comprised the literature to date. METHODS: Electronic health record (EHR) data from TriNetX (unmatched n = 21,629; matched n = 16,602) were used to investigate the effect of vitamin D status, as measured by 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D], on the odds of experiencing a positive COVID-19 test using multivariable logistic regression models with and without PS methodology. RESULTS: Having normal (≥ 30 ng/mL) versus inadequate 25(OH)D (< 30 ng/mL) was not associated with COVID-19 positivity overall (OR = 0.913, p = 0.18), in White individuals (OR = 0.920, p = 0.31), or in Black individuals (OR = 1.006, p = 0.96). When 25(OH)D was analyzed on a continuum, a 10 ng/mL increase in 25(OH)D lowered the odds of having a positive COVID-19 test overall (OR = 0.949, p = 0.003) and among White (OR = 0.935, p = 0.003), but not Black individuals (OR = 0.994, p = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Models which use weighting and matching methods resulted in smaller estimated effect sizes than models which do not use weighting or matching. These findings suggest a minimal protective effect of vitamin D status on COVID-19 test positivity in White individuals and no protective effect in Black individuals.

Does de-implementation of low value care impact the patient-clinician relationship? A mixed methods study.

Context: In the U.S., provision of LVC is prevalent (up to 20% of total health services), costly ($350 billion annually), and associated with patient harm. Concern about a negative impact on the patient-clinician relationship has been cited by primary care clinicians as a barrier to reducing LVC. Study Design: Mixed-methods study. Participants completed the Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9) after reading one of three vignettes about a clinician declining to provide a requested LVC service (antibiotics for sinusitis, screening EKG, or screening vitamin D test) or a comparison vignette. A different sample of participants was asked to imagine that their own clinician did not order requested antibiotics or screening EKG and then to respond to structured interview questions about satisfaction and trust. Setting: Primary care patients of a southwest Virginia health system. Population: Adults (n= 232 questionnaire/n= 24 interview). Outcome Measures: Participant demographics data, PDRQ-9 score for each vignette (higher score = greater relationship integrity), and thematic analysis of interview responses. Results: Among questionnaire participants, a lower PDRQ-9 score was associated with the vignette about not providing LVC vitamin D screening (31.2) compared with antibiotics (38.9), EKG screening (37.5), and the comparison vignette (36.4) (p<0.05). There was a statistically significant, but weak, correlation between education and PDRQ-9 score (r=0.2, p<0.01). More than half of interviewees believed that their satisfaction and trust would not be negatively impacted by not receiving the LVC service, citing the strength of their relationship with their clinician and faith in their guidance. Some even felt that not providing the service would increase their satisfaction and trust. Participants who believed their satisfaction and trust may be impacted seemed to recognize the complexity of the scenario, discussing medical necessity, potential harm, insurance, and the option to go elsewhere (ex: urgent care or a new doctor). However, most emphasized that negative impacts could be mitigated if the clinician listened to them, spent time with them, and offered understandable advice. Conclusions: Findings emphasize prioritization of the patient-clinician relationship in LVC de-implementation interventions and suggest minimal impact of such interventions on the patient-clinician relationship. Evidence of service-specific differences was observed.

Socializing the evidence for diabetes control to develop "mindlines": a qualitative pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on specific interventions to improve diabetes control in primary care is available, but this evidence is not always well-implemented. The concept of "mindlines" has been proposed to explain how clinicians integrate evidence using specifics of their practices and patients to produce knowledge-in-practice-in-context. The goal of this pilot study was to operationalize this concept by creating a venue for clinician-staff interaction concerning evidence. The research team attempted to hold "mindlines"-producing conversations in primary care practices about evidence to improve diabetes control. METHODS: Each of four primary care practices in a single health system held practice-wide conversations about a simple diabetes intervention model over a provided lunch. The conversations were relatively informal and encouraged participation from all. The research team recorded the conversations and took field notes. The team analyzed the data using a framework adapted from the "mindlines" research and noted additional emergent themes. RESULTS: While most of the conversation concerned barriers to implementation of the simple diabetes intervention model, there were examples of practices adopting and adapting the evidence to suit their own needs and context. Performance metrics regarding diabetes control for the four practices improved after the intervention. CONCLUSION: It appears that the type of conversations that "mindlines" research describes can be generated with facilitation around evidence, but further research is required to better understand the limitations and impact of this intervention.

Evaluation of Pragmatic Methods to Rapidly Assess Habitual Beverage Intake and Hydration Status in U.S. Collegiate Athletes.

Fluid intake recommendations have been established for the athletic population in order to promote adequate hydration. The Beverage Intake Questionnaire (BEVQ-15) is a quick and reliable food frequency questionnaire that quantifies habitual beverage intake, which has been validated in children, adolescents, and adults. However, no validated beverage consumption questionnaire is available for collegiate athletes. Urine color (UC), while feasible for determining hydration status, has not been validated within a variety of collegiate athletes. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the comparative validity and reliability of pragmatic methods to rapidly assess BEVQ-15 and UC rating in U.S. Division I collegiate athletes. Student-athletes (n = 120; 54% females; age 19 ± 1 years) from two universities were recruited to complete three study sessions. At the first and third sessions, the participants completed the BEVQ-15 and provided a urine sample to determine UC and urinary specific gravity. All sessions included completion of a 24-hr dietary recall. Total fluid intake (fl oz) was 111 ± 107 and 108 ± 42 using the BEVQ-15 and the mean of three 24-hr dietary recalls, respectively, which was not different between methods (p > .05). There were moderate associations between the BEVQ-15 and dietary recall results for total beverage intake fl oz and kcal(r = .413 and r = 4.65; p ≤ .05, respectively). Strong associations were noted between both researcher-rated and participant-rated UC with urinary specific gravity measures (r = .675 and r = .884; p ≤ .05, respectively). Therefore, these rapid assessment methods demonstrated acceptable validity and may be used as practical methods to determine whether athletes are meeting their hydration recommendations.