Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES:Few studies have considered how trends in opioid poisonings have changed among older adults. The objective of this study was to examine trends in fatal and nonfatal opioid-related poisonings ("exposures") among older adults. METHODS:National poison center data were used to examine trends in characteristics of reported exposures to commonly prescribed opioids between 2015 and 2021 among adults 60 years or older. We estimated the proportion of opioid exposures by demographic characteristics, the specific opioid(s) involved, exposure type, route of administration, other substances co-used, and medical outcomes for each calendar year. We estimated whether there were linear changes in prevalence by year using logistic regression. RESULTS:Although there was a decrease in the number of opioid exposures within the study population from 7706 in 2015 to 7337 in 2021 (a 4.8% decrease, P = 0.04), exposures increased for adults aged 70 to 79 years (a 14.0% increase, P < 0.001). The proportion classified as "abuse" increased by 63.3% ( P < 0.001). There were significant decreases in the proportion involving hydromorphone (a 23.3% decrease, P < 0.001) and morphine (a 22.0% decrease, P < 0.001), with an increase involving buprenorphine (a 216.0% increase, P < 0.001). The proportion increased for co-use of cocaine (a 488.9% increase, P < 0.001) and methamphetamine (a 220.0% increase, P = 0.02), with a decrease in co-use of benzodiazepines (a 25.5% decrease, P < 0.001). The proportion of major medical outcomes increased by 93.9% ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:National patterns of opioid-related poisonings are shifting among older adults, including the types of opioids involved and co-use of other drugs. These results can inform prevention and harm reduction efforts aimed at older adults.

BACKGROUND & AIMS/OBJECTIVE:The septin 9 blood test is indicated for colorectal cancer screening in individuals who decline first-line tests, but participation in this context is unclear. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare reoffering colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) alone versus also offering the blood test among individuals who declined colonoscopy and FIT. METHODS:Screen-eligible Veterans aged 50-75 years who declined colonoscopy and FIT within the previous 6 months were randomized to letter and telephone outreach to reoffer screening with colonoscopy/FIT only (control), or additionally offering the blood test as a second-line option (intervention). The primary outcome was completion of any screening test within 6 months. The secondary outcome was completion of a full screening strategy within 6 months, including colonoscopy for those with a positive noninvasive test. RESULTS:Of 359 participants who completed follow-up, 9.6% in the control group and 17.1% in the intervention group completed any screening (7.5% difference; P = .035). Uptake of colonoscopy and FIT was similar in the 2 groups. The full screening strategy was completed in 9.0% and 14.9% in the control and intervention groups, respectively (5.9% difference; P = .084). CONCLUSIONS:Among individuals who previously declined colonoscopy and FIT, offering a blood test as a secondary option increased screening by 7.5% without decreasing uptake of first-line screening options. However, completion of a full screening strategy did not increase. These findings indicate that a blood test is a promising method to improve colorectal cancer screening, but obtaining a timely colonoscopy after a positive noninvasive test remains a challenge (ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT03598166).

OBJECTIVE:To assess urologists' perceptions and practices related to smoking and smoking cessation. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Six survey questions were designed to assess beliefs, practices, and determinants related to tobacco use assessment and treatment (TUAT) in outpatient urology clinics. These questions were included in an annual census survey (2021) offered to all practicing urologists. Responses were weighted to represent the practicing US population of nonpediatric urologists (N=12,852). The primary outcome was affirmative responses to the question, "Do you agree it is important for urologists to screen for and provide smoking cessation treatment to patients in the outpatient clinic?" Practice patterns, perceptions, and opinions of optimal care delivery were assessed. RESULTS:In total, 98% of urologists agreed (27%) or strongly agreed (71%) that cigarette smoking is a significant contributor to urologic disease. However, only 58% agreed that TUAT is important in urology clinics. Most urologists (61%) advise patients who smoke to quit but do not provide additional cessation counseling or medications or arrange follow-up. The most frequently identified barriers to TUAT were lack of time (70%), perceptions that patients are unwilling to quit (44%), and lack of comfort prescribing cessation medications (42%). Additionally, 72% of respondents stated that urologists should provide a recommendation to quit and refer patients for cessation support. CONCLUSIONS:TUAT does not routinely occur in an evidence-based fashion in outpatient urology clinics. Addressing established barriers and facilitating these practices with multilevel implementation strategies can promote tobacco treatment and improve outcomes for patients with urologic disease.

INTRODUCTION:Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death in the USA. Low utilisation of treatments for smoking cessation remains a major barrier for reducing smoking rates. Financial incentives represent an innovative approach to increasing use of therapies for smoking cessation. This paper will describe the rationale and design of the Financial Incentives for Smoking Treatment II (FIESTA II) study, a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of goal-directed and outcome-based financial incentives to promote smoking cessation among hospitalised smokers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We are recruiting adult participants who smoked tobacco in the 30 days prior to initial interview and are contemplating quitting smoking. These participants will come from two hospitals in underserved communities in New York City and Los Angeles. They will be randomised into one of three arms. The first arm consists of goal-directed financial incentives plus enhanced usual care, which includes hospital-directed information about quitting smoking, nicotine replacement therapy and referral to a Quitline. The second arm involves outcome-based financial incentives plus enhanced usual care. The third arm consists of enhanced usual care alone. Multiple phone interviews with the participants will be completed after randomisation to assess smoking cessation. Participants will earn $20 for each follow-up interview completed and $30 for each smoking cessation test completed. Those who are randomised to the financial incentive groups can earn an additional $700. The participants in the outcome-based group will receive payments solely for exhibiting cessation, whereas the participants in the goal-based group are also eligible for receiving payments after meeting milestones such as speaking with a helpline coach. ETHICS:IRB#19-000 084. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03979885.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Mild cognitive impairment remains substantially underdiagnosed, especially in disadvantaged populations. Failure to diagnose deprives patients and families of the opportunity to treat reversible causes, make necessary life and lifestyle changes and receive disease-modifying treatments if caused by Alzheimer's disease. Primary care, as the entry point for most, plays a critical role in improving detection rates. METHODS:We convened a Work Group of national experts to develop consensus recommendations for policymakers and third-party payers on ways to increase the use of brief cognitive assessments (BCAs) in primary care. RESULTS:The group recommended three strategies to promote routine use of BCAs: providing primary care clinicians with suitable assessment tools; integrating BCAs into routine workflows; and crafting payment policies to encourage adoption of BCAs. DISSCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Sweeping changes and actions of multiple stakeholders are necessary to improve detection rates of mild cognitive impairment so that patients and families may benefit from timely interventions.

Longstanding gaps in the detection of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) and biopsychosocial care call for public health action to improve population health. We aim to broaden the understanding of the iterative role state plans have played over the last 20 years in prioritizing improvements in the detection of ADRD, primary care capacity, and equity for disproportionately affected populations. Informed by national ADRD priorities, state plans convene stakeholders to identify local needs, gaps, and barriers and set the stage for development of a national public health infrastructure that can align clinical practice reform with population health goals. We propose policy and practice actions that would accelerate the collaboration between public health, community organizations, and health systems to improve ADRD detection-the point of entry into care pathways that could ultimately improve outcomes on a national scale. HIGHLIGHTS: We systematically reviewed the evolution of state/territory plans for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Plan goals improved over time but lacked implementation capacity. Landmark federal legislation (2018) enabled funding for action and accountability. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funds three Public Health Centers of Excellence and many local initiatives. Four new policy steps would promote sustainable ADRD population health improvement.

BACKGROUND:Prediabetes affects 26.4 million people aged 65 years or older (48.8%) in the United States. Although older adults respond well to the evidence-based Diabetes Prevention Program, they are a heterogeneous group with differing physiological, biomedical, and psychosocial needs who can benefit from additional support to accommodate age-related changes in sensory and motor function. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this paper is to describe adaptations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Diabetes Prevention Program aimed at preventing diabetes among older adults (ages ≥65 years) and findings from a pilot of 2 virtual sessions of the adapted program that evaluated the acceptability of the content. METHODS:The research team adapted the program by incorporating additional resources necessary for older adults. A certified lifestyle coach delivered 2 sessions of the adapted content via videoconference to 189 older adults. RESULTS:The first session had a 34.9% (38/109) response rate to the survey, and the second had a 34% (30/88) response rate. Over three-quarters (50/59, 85%) of respondents agreed that they liked the virtual program, with 82% (45/55) agreeing that they would recommend it to a family member or a friend. CONCLUSIONS:This data will be used to inform intervention delivery in a randomized controlled trial comparing in-person versus virtual delivery of the adapted program.