Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:Operating rooms (ORs) are critical for hospital revenue and cost management, with utilization efficiency directly affecting financial outcomes. Traditional surgical scheduling often results in suboptimal OR use. We aim to build a machine learning (ML) model to predict incision times for robotic-assisted hysterectomies, enhancing scheduling accuracy and hospital finances. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective study was conducted using data from robotic-assisted hysterectomy cases performed between January 2017 and April 2021 across 3 hospitals within a large academic health system. Cases were filtered for surgeries performed by high-volume surgeons and those with an incision time of under 3 hours (n = 2,702). Features influencing incision time were extracted from electronic medical records and used to train 5 ML models (linear ridge regression, random forest, XGBoost, CatBoost, and explainable boosting machine [EBM]). Model performance was evaluated using a dynamic monthly update process and novel metrics such as wait-time blocks and excess-time blocks. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: < .001, 95% CI [-329 to -89]), translating to approximately 52-hours over the 51-month study period. The model predicted more surgeries within a 15% range of the true incision time compared to traditional methods. Influential features included surgeon experience, number of additional procedures, body mass index (BMI), and uterine size. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:The ML model enhanced the prediction of incision times for robotic-assisted hysterectomies, providing a potential solution to reduce OR underutilization and increase surgical throughput and hospital revenue.

BACKGROUND:During the COVID-19 pandemic, acute respiratory infection (ARI) antibiotic prescribing in ambulatory care markedly decreased. It is unclear if antibiotic prescription rates will remain lowered. METHODS:We used trend analyses of antibiotics prescribed during and after the first wave of COVID-19 to determine whether ARI antibiotic prescribing rates in ambulatory care have remained suppressed compared to pre-COVID-19 levels. Retrospective data was used from patients with ARI or UTI diagnosis code(s) for their encounter from 298 primary care and 66 urgent care practices within four academic health systems in New York, Wisconsin, and Utah between January 2017 and June 2022. The primary measures included antibiotic prescriptions per 100 non-COVID ARI encounters, encounter volume, prescribing trends, and change from expected trend. RESULTS:At baseline, during and after the first wave, the overall ARI antibiotic prescribing rates were 54.7, 38.5, and 54.7 prescriptions per 100 encounters, respectively. ARI antibiotic prescription rates saw a statistically significant decline after COVID-19 onset (step change -15.2, 95% CI: -19.6 to -4.8). During the first wave, encounter volume decreased 29.4% and, after the first wave, remained decreased by 188%. After the first wave, ARI antibiotic prescription rates were no longer significantly suppressed from baseline (step change 0.01, 95% CI: -6.3 to 6.2). There was no significant difference between UTI antibiotic prescription rates at baseline versus the end of the observation period. CONCLUSIONS:The decline in ARI antibiotic prescribing observed after the onset of COVID-19 was temporary, not mirrored in UTI antibiotic prescribing, and does not represent a long-term change in clinician prescribing behaviors. During a period of heightened awareness of a viral cause of ARI, a substantial and clinically meaningful decrease in clinician antibiotic prescribing was observed. Future efforts in antibiotic stewardship may benefit from continued study of factors leading to this reduction and rebound in prescribing rates.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Menu labeling has been implemented in restaurants in some US jurisdictions as early as 2008, but the extent to which menu labeling is associated with calories purchased is unclear. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To estimate the association of menu labeling with calories and nutrients purchased and assess geographic variation in results. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:A cohort study was conducted with a quasi-experimental design using actual transaction data from Taco Bell restaurants from calendar years 2007 to 2014 US restaurants with menu labeling matched to comparison restaurants using synthetic control methods. Data were analyzed from May to October 2023. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:Menu labeling policies in 6 US jurisdictions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:The primary outcome was calories per transaction. Secondary outcomes included total and saturated fat, carbohydrates, protein, sugar, fiber, and sodium. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The final sample included 2329 restaurants, with menu labeling in 474 (31 468 restaurant-month observations). Most restaurants (94.3%) were located in California. Difference-in-differences model results indicated that customers purchased 24.7 (95% CI, 23.6-25.7) fewer calories per transaction from restaurants in the menu labeling group in the 3- to 24-month follow-up period vs the comparison group, including 21.9 (95% CI, 20.9-22.9) fewer calories in the 3- to 12-month follow-up period and 25.0 (95% CI, 24.0-26.1) fewer calories in the 13- to 24-month follow-up period. Changes in the nutrient content of transactions were consistent with calorie estimates. Findings in California were similar to overall estimates in magnitude and direction; yet, among restaurants outside of California, no association was observed in the 3- to 24-month period. The outcome of menu labeling also differed by item category and time of day, with a larger decrease in the number of tacos vs other items purchased and a larger decrease in calories purchased during breakfast vs other times of the day in the 3- to 24-month period. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this quasi-experimental cohort study, fewer calories were purchased in restaurants with calorie labels compared with those with no labels, suggesting that consumers are sensitive to calorie information on menu boards, although associations differed by location.

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 .

BACKGROUND:Hospital acquired anemia is common during admission and can result in increased transfusion and length of stay. Recumbent posture is known to lead to lower hemoglobin measurements. We tested to see if an initiative promoting evening lab draws would lead to higher hemoglobin measurements due to more time in upright posture during the day and evening. METHODS:We included patients hospitalized on 2 medical units, beginning March 26, 2020 and discharged prior to January 25, 2021. On one of the units, we implemented an initiative to have routine laboratory draws in the evening rather than the morning starting on August 26, 2020. There were 1217 patients on the control unit and 1265 on the intervention unit during the entire study period. First we used a linear mixed-effects model to see if timing of blood draw was associated with hemoglobin level in the pre-intervention period. We then compared levels of hemoglobin before and after the intervention using a difference-in-difference analysis. RESULTS:In the pre-intervention period, evening blood draws were associated with higher hemoglobin compared to morning (0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.35). Evening blood draws increased with the intervention (10.3% vs 47.9%, P > 0.001). However, the intervention floor was not associated with hemoglobin levels in difference-in-difference analysis (coefficient of -0.15; 95% CI, -0.51-0.21). CONCLUSIONS:While evening blood draws were associated with higher hemoglobin levels, an intervention that successfully changed timing of routine labs to the evening did not lead to an increase in hemoglobin levels.

BACKGROUND:Language concordance between health care practitioners and patients have recently been shown to lower the risk of adverse health events. Continuity of care also been shown to have the same impact. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this paper is to examine the relative effectiveness of both continuity of care and language concordance as alternative or complementary interventions to improve health outcomes of people with limited English proficiency. DESIGN:A multivariable logistic regression model using rehospitalization as the dependent variable was built. The variable of interest was created to compare language concordance and continuity of care. PARTICIPANTS:The final sample included 22,103 patients from the New York City area between 2010 and 2015 who were non-English-speaking and admitted to their home health site following hospital discharge. MEASURES:The odds ratio (OR) average marginal effect (AME) of each included variable was calculated for model analysis. RESULTS:When compared with low continuity of care and high language concordance, high continuity of care and high language concordance significantly decreased readmissions (OR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.62-0.80, P<0.001, AME=-4.95%), along with high continuity of care and low language concordance (OR=0.80, 95% CI: 0.74-0.86, P<0.001, AME=-3.26%). Low continuity of care and high language concordance did not significantly impact readmissions (OR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.86-1.26, P=0.672, AME=0.64%). CONCLUSION:In the US home health system, enhancing continuity of care for those with language barriers may be helpful to address disparities and reduce hospital readmission rates.

DISCLAIMER/CONCLUSIONS:In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Despite progress in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including the development of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), more clinical data to support the use of mAbs in outpatients with COVID-19 is needed. This study is designed to determine the impact of bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab/etesevimab, or casirivimab/imdevimab on clinical outcomes within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS:A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single academic medical center with 3 campuses in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Long Island, NY. Patients 12 years of age or older who tested positive for COVID-19 or were treated with a COVID-19-specific therapy, including COVID-19 mAb therapies, at the study site between November 24, 2020, and May 15, 2021, were included. The primary outcomes included rates of emergency department (ED) visit, inpatient admission, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or death within 30 days from the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS:A total of 1,344 mAb-treated patients were propensity matched to 1,344 patients with COVID-19 patients who were not treated with mAb therapy. Within 30 days of diagnosis, among the patients who received mAb therapy, 101 (7.5%) presented to the ED and 79 (5.9%) were admitted. Among the patients who did not receive mAb therapy, 165 (12.3%) presented to the ED and 156 (11.6%) were admitted (relative risk [RR], 0.61 [95% CI, 0.50-0.75] and 0.51 [95% CI, 0.40-0.64], respectively). Four mAb patients (0.3%) and 2.64 control patients (0.2%) were admitted to the ICU (RR, 01.51; 95% CI, 0.45-5.09). Six mAb-treated patients (0.4%) and 3.37 controls (0.3%) died and/or were admitted to hospice (RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.54-4.83). mAb therapy in ambulatory patients with COVID-19 decreases the risk of ED presentation and hospital admission within 30 days of diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: We previously developed and validated a predictive model to help clinicians identify hospitalized adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who may be ready for discharge given their low risk of adverse events. Whether this algorithm can prompt more timely discharge for stable patients in practice is unknown. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to estimate the effect of displaying risk scores on length of stay (LOS). METHODS: We integrated model output into the electronic health record (EHR) at four hospitals in one health system by displaying a green/orange/red score indicating low/moderate/high-risk in a patient list column and a larger COVID-19 summary report visible for each patient. Display of the score was pseudo-randomized 1:1 into intervention and control arms using a patient identifier passed to the model execution code. Intervention effect was assessed by comparing LOS between intervention and control groups. Adverse safety outcomes of death, hospice, and re-presentation were tested separately and as a composite indicator. We tracked adoption and sustained use through daily counts of score displays. RESULTS: Enrolling 1,010 patients from May 15, 2020 to December 7, 2020, the trial found no detectable difference in LOS. The intervention had no impact on safety indicators of death, hospice or re-presentation after discharge. The scores were displayed consistently throughout the study period but the study lacks a causally linked process measure of provider actions based on the score. Secondary analysis revealed complex dynamics in LOS temporally, by primary symptom, and hospital location. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS: An AI-based COVID-19 risk score displayed passively to clinicians during routine care of hospitalized adults with COVID-19 was safe but had no detectable impact on LOS. Health technology challenges such as insufficient adoption, nonuniform use, and provider trust compounded with temporal factors of the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to the null result. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04570488.

BACKGROUND:Both community health workers and the Project ECHO model of specialist telementoring are innovative approaches to support primary care providers in the care of complex patients with diabetes.We studied the effect of an intervention that combined these two approaches on glycemic control. METHODS:Patients with diabetes were recruited from 10 federally qualified health centers in New Mexico. We used electronic health record (EHR) data to compare HbA1c levels prior to intervention enrollment with HbA1c levels after 3 months (early follow-up) and 12 months (late follow-up) following enrollment. We propensity matched intervention patients to comparison patients from other sites within the same EHR databases to estimate the average treatment effect. RESULTS:Among 557 intervention patients with HbA1c data, mean HbA1c decreased from 10.5% to 9.3% in the pre- versus post-intervention periods (p<0.001). As compared to the comparison group, the intervention was associated with a change in HbA1c of -0.2% (95% CI -0.4%-0.5%) and -0.3 (95% CI -0.5-0.0) in the early and late follow-up cohorts, respectively. The intervention was associated with a significant increase in percent of patients with HbA1c<8% in the late follow-up cohort (8.1%, 95%CI 2.2%-13.9%) but not the early follow-up cohort (3.6%, 95% CI -1.5%-8.7%) DISCUSSION: : The intervention was associated with a substantial decrease in HbA1c in intervention patients, although this improvement was not different from matched comparison patients in early follow-up. While combining community health workers with Project ECHO may hold promise for improving glycemic control, particularly in the longer term, further evaluations are needed.

PURPOSE:Provide real-world data regarding the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality in breast cancer (BC) patients on active cancer treatment. METHODS:Clinical data were abstracted from the 3778 BC patients seen at a multisite cancer center in New York between February 1, 2020 and May 1, 2020, including patient demographics, tumor histology, cancer treatment, and SARS-CoV-2 testing results. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by treatment type (chemotherapy [CT] vs endocrine and/or HER2 directed therapy [E/H]) was compared by Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting. In those diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, Mann-Whitney test was used to a assess risk factors for severe disease and mortality. RESULTS:Three thousand sixty-two patients met study inclusion criteria with 641 patients tested for SARS-COV-2 by RT-PCR or serology. Overall, 64 patients (2.1%) were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection by either serology, RT-PCR, or documented clinical diagnosis. Comparing matched patients who received chemotherapy (n = 379) with those who received non-cytotoxic therapies (n = 2343) the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 did not differ between treatment groups (weighted risk; 3.5% CT vs 2.7% E/H, P = .523). Twenty-seven patients (0.9%) expired over follow-up, with 10 deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Chemotherapy was not associated with increased risk for death following SARS-CoV-2 infection (weighted risk; 0.7% CT vs 0.1% E/H, P = .246). Advanced disease (stage IV), age, BMI, and Charlson's Comorbidity Index score were associated with increased mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection (P ≤ .05). CONCLUSION:BC treatment, including chemotherapy, can be safely administered in the context of enhanced infectious precautions, and should not be withheld particularly when given for curative intent.