Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Overprescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) remains a major issue in outpatient settings. Use of clinical prediction rules (CPRs) can reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing but they remain underutilized by physicians and advanced practice providers. A registered nurse (RN)-led model of an electronic health record-integrated CPR (iCPR) for low-acuity ARIs may be an effective alternative to address the barriers to a physician-driven model. METHODS:Following qualitative usability testing, we will conduct a stepped-wedge practice-level cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) examining the effect of iCPR-guided RN care for low acuity patients with ARI. The primary hypothesis to be tested is: Implementation of RN-led iCPR tools will reduce antibiotic prescribing across diverse primary care settings. Specifically, this study aims to: (1) determine the impact of iCPRs on rapid strep test and chest x-ray ordering and antibiotic prescribing rates when used by RNs; (2) examine resource use patterns and cost-effectiveness of RN visits across diverse clinical settings; (3) determine the impact of iCPR-guided care on patient satisfaction; and (4) ascertain the effect of the intervention on RN and physician burnout. DISCUSSION:This study represents an innovative approach to using an iCPR model led by RNs and specifically designed to address inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. This study has the potential to provide guidance on the effectiveness of delegating care of low-acuity patients with ARIs to RNs to increase use of iCPRs and reduce antibiotic overprescribing for ARIs in outpatient settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04255303, Registered February 5 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04255303 .

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is a tool for patients to share data collected outside of office visits. RPM uses technology and the digital transmission of data to inform clinician decision-making in patient care. Using RPM to track routine physical activity is feasible to operationalize, given contemporary consumer-grade devices that can sync to the electronic health record. Objective monitoring through RPM can be more reliable than patient self-reporting for physical activity. DESIGN AND METHODS/METHODS:This article reports on four pilot studies that highlight the utility and practicality of RPM for physical activity monitoring in outpatient clinical care. Settings include endocrinology, cardiology, neurology, and pulmonology settings. RESULTS:The four pilot use cases discussed demonstrate how RPM is utilized to monitor physical activity, a shift that has broad implications for prediction, prevention, diagnosis, and management of chronic disease and rehabilitation progress. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:If RPM for physical activity is to be expanded, it will be important to consider that certain populations may face challenges when accessing digital health services. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:RPM technology provides an opportunity for clinicians to obtain objective feedback for monitoring progress of patients in rehabilitation settings. Nurses working in rehabilitation settings may need to provide additional patient education and support to improve uptake.

Indiscriminate use of predictive models incorporating race can reinforce biases present in source data and lead to an exacerbation of health disparities. In some countries, such as the United States, there is therefore a push to remove race from prediction models; however, there are still many prediction models that use race as an input. Biomedical informaticists who are given the responsibility of using these predictive models in healthcare environments are likely to be faced with questions like how to deal with race covariates in these models. Thus, there is a need for a pragmatic framework to help model users think through how to include race in their chosen model so as to avoid inadvertently exacerbating disparities. In this paper, we use the case study of lung cancer screening to propose a simple framework to guide how model users can approach the use (or non-use) of race inputs in the predictive models they are tasked with leveraging in electronic health records and clinical workflows.

BACKGROUND:Mobile health (mHealth) tools are used to collect data on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and facilitate the assessment of patients' self-management behaviors outside the clinic environment. Despite the high availability of mHealth diabetes tools, there is a lack of understanding regarding the underlying reasons why these mHealth PRO tools succeed or fail in terms of changing patients' self-management behaviors. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to identify the factors that drive engagement with an mHealth PRO tool and facilitate patients' adoption of self-management behaviors, as well as elicit suggestions for improvement. METHODS:) levels and adherence to self-management behaviors at 12 months among patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Patients randomized to i-Matter participated in semistructured interviews about their experiences at the 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month study visits. A qualitative analysis of the interviews was conducted by 2 experienced qualitative researchers using conventional qualitative content analysis. RESULTS:The sample comprised 71 patients, of whom 67 (94%) completed at least one interview (n=48, 72% female patients; n=25, 37% identified as African American or Black; mean age 56.65 [SD 9.79] years). We identified 4 overarching themes and 6 subthemes. Theme 1 showed that the patients' reasons for engagement with i-Matter were multifactorial. Patients were driven by internal motivating factors that bolstered their engagement and helped them feel accountable for their diabetes (subtheme 1) and external motivating factors that helped to serve as reminders to be consistent with their self-management behaviors (subtheme 2). Theme 2 revealed that the use of i-Matter changed patients' attitudes toward their disease and their health behaviors in 2 ways: patients developed more positive attitudes about their condition and their ability to effectively self-manage it (subtheme 3), and they also developed a better awareness of their current behaviors, which motivated them to adopt healthier lifestyle behaviors (subtheme 4). Theme 3 showed that patients felt more committed to their health as a result of using i-Matter. Theme 4 highlighted the limitations of i-Matter, which included its technical design (subtheme 5) and the need for more resources to support the PRO data collected and shared through the tool (subtheme 6). CONCLUSIONS:This study isolated internal and external factors that prompted patients to change their views about their diabetes, become more engaged with the intervention and their health, and adopt healthy behaviors. These behavioral mechanisms provide important insights to drive future development of mHealth interventions that could lead to sustained behavior change.

BACKGROUND:Remote patient monitoring (RPM) technologies can support patients living with chronic conditions through self-monitoring of physiological measures and enhance clinicians' diagnostic and treatment decisions. However, to date, large-scale pragmatic RPM implementation within health systems has been limited, and understanding of the impacts of RPM technologies on clinical workflows and care experience is lacking. OBJECTIVE:In this study, we evaluate the early implementation of operational RPM initiatives for chronic disease management within the ambulatory network of an academic medical center in New York City, focusing on the experiences of "early adopter" clinicians and patients. METHODS:Using a multimethod qualitative approach, we conducted (1) interviews with 13 clinicians across 9 specialties considered as early adopters and supporters of RPM and (2) speculative design sessions exploring the future of RPM in clinical care with 21 patients and patient representatives, to better understand experiences, preferences, and expectations of pragmatic RPM use for health care delivery. RESULTS:We identified themes relevant to RPM implementation within the following areas: (1) data collection and practices, including impacts of taking real-world measures and issues of data sharing, security, and privacy; (2) proactive and preventive care, including proactive and preventive monitoring, and proactive interventions and support; and (3) health disparities and equity, including tailored and flexible care and implicit bias. We also identified evidence for mitigation and support to address challenges in each of these areas. CONCLUSIONS:This study highlights the unique contexts, perceptions, and challenges regarding the deployment of RPM in clinical practice, including its potential implications for clinical workflows and work experiences. Based on these findings, we offer implementation and design recommendations for health systems interested in deploying RPM-enabled health care.

BACKGROUND:Chatbots are being piloted to draft responses to patient questions, but patients' ability to distinguish between provider and chatbot responses and patients' trust in chatbots' functions are not well established. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess the feasibility of using ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) or a similar artificial intelligence-based chatbot for patient-provider communication. METHODS:A survey study was conducted in January 2023. Ten representative, nonadministrative patient-provider interactions were extracted from the electronic health record. Patients' questions were entered into ChatGPT with a request for the chatbot to respond using approximately the same word count as the human provider's response. In the survey, each patient question was followed by a provider- or ChatGPT-generated response. Participants were informed that 5 responses were provider generated and 5 were chatbot generated. Participants were asked-and incentivized financially-to correctly identify the response source. Participants were also asked about their trust in chatbots' functions in patient-provider communication, using a Likert scale from 1-5. RESULTS:A US-representative sample of 430 study participants aged 18 and older were recruited on Prolific, a crowdsourcing platform for academic studies. In all, 426 participants filled out the full survey. After removing participants who spent less than 3 minutes on the survey, 392 respondents remained. Overall, 53.3% (209/392) of respondents analyzed were women, and the average age was 47.1 (range 18-91) years. The correct classification of responses ranged between 49% (192/392) to 85.7% (336/392) for different questions. On average, chatbot responses were identified correctly in 65.5% (1284/1960) of the cases, and human provider responses were identified correctly in 65.1% (1276/1960) of the cases. On average, responses toward patients' trust in chatbots' functions were weakly positive (mean Likert score 3.4 out of 5), with lower trust as the health-related complexity of the task in the questions increased. CONCLUSIONS:ChatGPT responses to patient questions were weakly distinguishable from provider responses. Laypeople appear to trust the use of chatbots to answer lower-risk health questions. It is important to continue studying patient-chatbot interaction as chatbots move from administrative to more clinical roles in health care.

BACKGROUND:Low medication adherence is a common cause of high blood pressure but is often unrecognized in clinical practice. Electronic data linkages between electronic health records (EHRs) and pharmacies offer the opportunity to identify low medication adherence, which can be used for interventions at the point of care. We developed a multicomponent intervention that uses linked EHR and pharmacy data to automatically identify patients with elevated blood pressure and low medication adherence. The intervention then combines team-based care with EHR-based workflows to address medication nonadherence. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to describe the design of the Leveraging EHR Technology and Team Care to Address Medication Adherence (TEAMLET) trial, which tests the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention that leverages EHR-based data and team-based care on medication adherence among patients with hypertension. METHODS:TEAMLET is a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial in which 10 primary care practices will be randomized 1:1 to the multicomponent intervention or usual care. We will include all patients with hypertension and low medication adherence who are seen at enrolled practices. The primary outcome is medication adherence, as measured by the proportion of days covered, and the secondary outcome is clinic systolic blood pressure. We will also assess intervention implementation, including adoption, acceptability, fidelity, cost, and sustainability. RESULTS:As of May 2023, we have randomized 10 primary care practices into the study, with 5 practices assigned to each arm of the trial. The enrollment for the study commenced on October 5, 2022, and the trial is currently ongoing. We anticipate patient recruitment to go through the fall of 2023 and the primary outcomes to be assessed in the fall of 2024. CONCLUSIONS:The TEAMLET trial will evaluate the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention that leverages EHR-based data and team-based care on medication adherence. If successful, the intervention could offer a scalable approach to address inadequate blood pressure control among millions of patients with hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05349422; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05349422. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)/UNASSIGNED:DERR1-10.2196/47930.

BACKGROUND:Diabetes mellitus is a common medical complication of pregnancy, and its treatment is complex. Recent years have seen an increase in the application of mobile health tools and advanced technologies, such as remote patient monitoring, with the aim of improving care for diabetes mellitus in pregnancy. Previous studies of these technologies for the treatment of diabetes in pregnancy have been small and have not clearly shown clinical benefit with implementation. OBJECTIVE:Remote patient monitoring allows clinicians to monitor patients' health data (such as glucose values) in near real-time, between office visits, to make timely adjustments to care. Our objective was to determine if using remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes in pregnancy leads to an improvement in maternal and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with diabetes mellitus managed by the maternal-fetal medicine practice at one academic institution between October 2019 and April 2021. This practice transitioned from paper-based blood glucose logs to remote patient monitoring in February 2020. Remote patient monitoring options included (1) device integration with Bluetooth glucometers that automatically uploaded measured glucose values to the patient's Epic MyChart application or (2) manual entry in which patients manually logged their glucose readings into their MyChart application. Values in the MyChart application directly transferred to the patient's electronic health record for review and management by clinicians. In total, 533 patients were studied. We compared 173 patients managed with paper logs to 360 patients managed with remote patient monitoring (176 device integration and 184 manual entry). Our primary outcomes were composite maternal morbidity (which included third- and fourth-degree lacerations, chorioamnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage requiring transfusion, postpartum hysterectomy, wound infection or separation, venous thromboembolism, and maternal admission to the intensive care unit) and composite neonatal morbidity (which included umbilical cord pH <7.00, 5 minute Apgar score <7, respiratory morbidity, hyperbilirubinemia, meconium aspiration, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, sepsis, pneumonia, seizures, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, shoulder dystocia, trauma, brain or body cooling, and neonatal intensive care unit admission). Secondary outcomes were measures of glycemic control and the individual components of the primary composite outcomes. We also performed a secondary analysis in which the patients who used the two different remote patient monitoring options (device integration vs manual entry) were compared. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, 2-sample t, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the groups. A result was considered statistically significant at P<.05. RESULTS:Maternal baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the remote patient monitoring and paper groups aside from a slightly higher baseline rate of chronic hypertension in the remote patient monitoring group (6.1% vs 1.2%; P=.011). The primary outcomes of composite maternal and composite neonatal morbidity were not significantly different between the groups. However, remote patient monitoring patients submitted more glucose values (177 vs 146; P=.008), were more likely to achieve glycemic control in target range (79.2% vs 52.0%; P<.0001), and achieved the target range sooner (median, 3.3 vs 4.1 weeks; P=.025) than patients managed with paper logs. This was achieved without increasing in-person visits. Remote patient monitoring patients had lower rates of preeclampsia (5.8% vs 15.0%; P=.0006) and their infants had lower rates of neonatal hypoglycemia in the first 24 hours of life (29.8% vs 51.7%; P<.0001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is superior to a traditional paper-based approach in achieving glycemic control and is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes.