Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND & AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Understanding the epidemiology of bleeding and thromboembolism (clotting) in liver cirrhosis provides important data for future studies and policymaking; however, head-to-head comparisons of bleeding and clotting remain limited. METHODS:This is a populational retrospective cohort study using the US National Readmission Database of 2018 to compare the incidence and outcomes of bleeding and clotting events in patients with liver cirrhosis. The primary outcomes were the 11-month incidence proportion of bleeding and clotting events. RESULTS:Of 1 304 815 participants, 26 569 had liver cirrhosis (45.0% women, mean age 57.2 [SD, 12.7] years). During the 11-month follow-up, in patients with cirrhosis, for bleeding and clotting events, the incidence proportions was 15.3% and 6.6%; the risk-standardized all-cause mortality rates were 2.4% and 1.0%; the rates of intensive care intervention were 4.1% and 1.9%; the rates of rehabilitation transfer were .2% and .2%; the cumulative length of stays were 45 100 and 23 566 days; total hospital costs were 147 and 84 million US dollars; total hospital charges were 620 and 365 million US dollars. Compared to non-cirrhosis, liver cirrhosis was associated with higher rates of bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.02 [95% CI, 2.85-3.20]) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) (18.46 [14.86-22.92]), and slightly lower risks of other non-PVT venous thromboembolic events (.82 [.75-.89]). CONCLUSIONS:Bleeding is more common than thromboembolism in patients with liver cirrhosis, causes higher morbidity, mortality and resource utilization. Liver cirrhosis is an independent risk factor for bleeding and PVT, but not non-PVT thromboembolism including venous thromboembolism, acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) varies significantly in symptomatic and physiologic presentation. Identifying disease subtypes from molecular data, collected from easily accessible blood samples, can help stratify patients and guide disease management and treatment. METHODS:Blood gene expression measured by RNA-sequencing in the COPDGene Study was analyzed using a network perturbation analysis method. Each COPD sample was compared against a learned reference gene network to determine the part that is deregulated. Gene deregulation values were used to cluster the disease samples. RESULTS:The discovery set included 617 former smokers from COPDGene. Four distinct gene network subtypes are identified with significant differences in symptoms, exercise capacity and mortality. These clusters do not necessarily correspond with the levels of lung function impairment and are independently validated in two external cohorts: 769 former smokers from COPDGene and 431 former smokers in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Additionally, we identify several genes that are significantly deregulated across these subtypes, including DSP and GSTM1, which have been previously associated with COPD through genome-wide association study (GWAS). CONCLUSIONS:The identified subtypes differ in mortality and in their clinical and functional characteristics, underlining the need for multi-dimensional assessment potentially supplemented by selected markers of gene expression. The subtypes were consistent across cohorts and could be used for new patient stratification and disease prognosis.

BACKGROUND:The improvements in care resulting from clinical decision support (CDS) have been significantly limited by consistently low health care provider adoption. Health care provider attitudes toward CDS, specifically psychological and behavioral barriers, are not typically addressed during any stage of CDS development, although they represent an important barrier to adoption. Emerging evidence has shown the surprising power of using insights from the field of behavioral economics to address psychological and behavioral barriers. Nudges are formal applications of behavioral economics, defined as positive reinforcement and indirect suggestions that have a nonforced effect on decision-making. OBJECTIVE:Our goal is to employ a user-centered design process to develop a CDS tool-the pulmonary embolism (PE) risk calculator-for PE risk stratification in the emergency department that incorporates a behavior theory-informed nudge to address identified behavioral barriers to use. METHODS:All study activities took place at a large academic health system in the New York City metropolitan area. Our study used a user-centered and behavior theory-based approach to achieve the following two aims: (1) use mixed methods to identify health care provider barriers to the use of an active CDS tool for PE risk stratification and (2) develop a new CDS tool-the PE risk calculator-that addresses behavioral barriers to health care providers' adoption of CDS by incorporating nudges into the user interface. These aims were guided by the revised Observational Research Behavioral Information Technology model. A total of 50 clinicians who used the original version of the tool were surveyed with a quantitative instrument that we developed based on a behavior theory framework-the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior framework. A semistructured interview guide was developed based on the survey responses. Inductive methods were used to analyze interview session notes and audio recordings from 12 interviews. Revised versions of the tool were developed that incorporated nudges. RESULTS:Functional prototypes were developed by using Axure PRO (Axure Software Solutions) software and usability tested with end users in an iterative agile process (n=10). The tool was redesigned to address 4 identified major barriers to tool use; we included 2 nudges and a default. The 6-month pilot trial for the tool was launched on October 1, 2021. CONCLUSIONS:Clinicians highlighted several important psychological and behavioral barriers to CDS use. Addressing these barriers, along with conducting traditional usability testing, facilitated the development of a tool with greater potential to transform clinical care. The tool will be tested in a prospective pilot trial. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)/UNASSIGNED:DERR1-10.2196/42653.

BACKGROUND:While emerging studies suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic caused disruptions in routine healthcare utilization, the full impact of the pandemic on healthcare utilization among diverse group of patients with type 2 diabetes is unclear. The purpose of this study is to examine trends in healthcare utilization, including in-person and telehealth visits, among U.S. veterans with type 2 diabetes before, during and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, by demographics, pre-pandemic glycemic control, and geographic region. METHODS:We longitudinally examined healthcare utilization in a large national cohort of veterans with new diabetes diagnoses between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2018. The analytic sample was 733,006 veterans with recently-diagnosed diabetes, at least 1 encounter with veterans administration between March 2018-2020, and followed through March 2021. Monthly rates of glycohemoglobin (HbA1c) measurements, in-person and telehealth outpatient visits, and prescription fills for diabetes and hypertension medications were compared before and after March 2020 using interrupted time-series design. Log-linear regression model was used for statistical analysis. Secular trends were modeled with penalized cubic splines. RESULTS:In the initial 3 months after the pandemic onset, we observed large reductions in monthly rates of HbA1c measurements, from 130 (95%CI,110-140) to 50 (95%CI,30-80) per 1000 veterans, and in-person outpatient visits, from 1830 (95%CI,1640-2040) to 810 (95%CI,710-930) per 1000 veterans. However, monthly rates of telehealth visits doubled between March 2020-2021 from 330 (95%CI,310-350) to 770 (95%CI,720-820) per 1000 veterans. This pattern of increases in telehealth utilization varied by community type, with lowest increase in rural areas, and by race/ethnicity, with highest increase among non-hispanic Black veterans. Combined in-person and telehealth outpatient visits rebounded to pre-pandemic levels after 3 months. Despite notable changes in HbA1c measurements and visits during that initial window, we observed no changes in prescription fills rates. CONCLUSIONS:Healthcare utilization among veterans with diabetes was substantially disrupted at the onset of the pandemic, but rebounded after 3 months. There was disparity in uptake of telehealth visits by geography and race/ethnicity.

BACKGROUND:As the quality of cancer care improves, oncology patients face a rapidly increasing number of treatment options. Thus, it is vital that they are full and active partners in the treatment decision-making process. Awareness of disease status has been investigated in the literature; it has been inconsistently conceptualized and operationalized. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this integrative review was to develop a conceptual definition and model of the awareness of disease status among patients with cancer. METHODS:Whittemore and Knafl's integrative review methodology guided this article. We obtained data through a systematic search of 8 databases. Key terms utilized were awareness, perception, truth disclosure, diagnosis, prognosis, terminal illness, status, neoplasm, and metastasis. Dates through January 2020 were searched to capture all relevant articles. Sixty-nine articles met inclusion criteria. RESULTS:The integrative review methodology guided the development of a conceptual definition and model. The concept of "awareness of disease status" was defined as the individual patient's understanding of being diagnosed and treated for cancer based on the multifactorial components of individual patient characteristics and contextually driven communication practices of healthcare providers. This understanding is dynamic and changes throughout the disease trajectory. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These findings will inform consistency in the literature. Such consistency may improve person-centered clinical communication, care planning practices, and, ultimately, cancer-related outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE/CONCLUSIONS:With a greater understanding of the complexity of patients' awareness of disease status, nurses will be able to guide their patients to make informed decisions throughout their disease trajectory.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:, the gene encoding the anti-inflammatory IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra), on the cytokine release syndrome and mortality. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:gene were assessed for association with laboratory markers of the cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and mortality. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:rs419598 CC SNV exhibited lower inflammatory biomarker levels, and was associated with reduced mortality compared to the CT/TT genotype in men (OR 0.49 (0.23 - 1.00); 0.052), with the most pronounced effect observed between the ages of 55-74 [5.5% vs. 18.4%, p<0.001]. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:modulates the COVID-19 cytokine release syndrome via endogenous " anti-inflammatory" mechanisms. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT/UNASSIGNED:merits further evaluation in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND:There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. METHODS:Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. RESULTS:6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for mortality were 1.58 (95% CI: 1.46, 1.70) and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and amongst those with current cancer (aOR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.90). CONCLUSIONS:Current cancer, especially amongst younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among COVID-19 patients; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. IMPACT/CONCLUSIONS:This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

To understand the impact of COVID-19-related disruptions on PrEP services, we reviewed PrEP prescriptions at NYC Health + Hospitals/Bellevue from July 2019 through July 2021. PrEP prescriptions were examined as PrEP person-equivalents (PrEP PE) in order to account for the variable time of refill duration (i.e., 1-3 months). To assess "PrEP coverage", we calculated PrEP medication possession ratios (MPR) while patients were under study observation. Pre-clinic closure, mean PrEP PE = 244.2 (IQR 189.2, 287.5; median = 252.5) were observed. Across levels of clinic closures, mean PrEP PE = 247.3, (IQR 215.5, 265.4; median = 219.9) during 100% clinic closure, 255.4 (IQR 224, 284.3; median = 249.0) during 80% closure, and 274.6 (IQR 273.0, 281.0; median = 277.2) during 50% closure were observed. Among patients continuously prescribed PrEP pre-COVID-19, the mean MPR mean declined from 83% (IQR 72-100%; median = 100%) to 63% (IQR 35-97%; median = 66%) after the onset of COVID-19. For patients newly initiated on PrEP after the onset of COVID-19, the mean MPR was 73% (IQR 41-100%; median = 100%). Our ability to sustain PrEP provisions, as measured by both PrEP PE and MPR, can likely be attributed to our pre-COVID-19 system for PrEP delivery, which emphasizes navigation, same-day initiation, and primary care integration. In the era of COVID-19 as well as future unforeseen healthcare disruptions, PrEP programs must be robust and flexible in order to sustain PrEP delivery.