Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Older adults account for a large proportion of emergency department visits, but those with serious life-limiting illness may benefit most from referral to home and community services instead of hospitalization. We aim to document emergency provider perspectives on facilitators and barriers to accessing home and community services for older adults with serious life-limiting illness. METHODS:We conducted interviewer-administered semi-structured interviews with emergency providers from health systems across the United States to obtain provider perspectives on facilitators and barriers to accessing home and community services. We completed qualitative thematic analysis using an iterative process to develop themes and subthemes to summarize provider responses. RESULTS:We interviewed 8 emergency nurses and 10 emergency physicians across 11 health systems. Emergency providers were familiar with local home and community services. Facilitators to accessing these services include care management and social workers. Barriers include services that are not accessible full-time to receive referrals, insurance/payment, and the busy nature of the emergency department. The most helpful reported services were hospice, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and visiting nursing services. Home-based palliative care and full-time emergency department-based care management and social work were the services most desired by providers. Providers expressed support for improving access to home and community services in the hopes of decreasing unnecessary emergency visits and inpatient admissions, and to provide patients with greater options for supportive care. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Obtaining the perspective of emergency providers highlights important considerations to accessing HCS for older-adults with serious life-limiting illness from the emergency department. This study provides foundational information for futures studies and initiatives for improving access to home and community services directly from the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION:CareMOBI (Mhealth for Organizations to Bolster Interconnectedness) is a mobile application designed to facilitate information exchange between primary care providers (PCPs) and adult day centers (ADCs). A key function of CareMOBI is to synthesize information collected outside of the provider's office (ie,: in the ADC or at home) and distill the most relevant data points into an exportable clinical summary that can help inform clinical decision making by the PCP with information from outside providers who are not formally embedded within health systems. In this study, we used a qualitative approach to understand the acceptability and utility of the clinical summary template within CareMOBI. METHODS:Purposive sampling, followed by snowball sampling, was used to recruit PCPs from a variety of primary care practice settings (i.e. home-based, academic). Semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually to elicit feedback on the user-experience after interaction with a prototype template. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS:Our sample (n = 10) consisted of physicians and nurse practitioners in a variety of settings. Feedback suggested that the summary template facilitates interdisciplinary, bidirectional, succinct, and relevant information exchange across care teams. The summary template effectively integrates observations and assessments from team members, centralizes them, and allows PCPs to hone in on the most salient components to inform clinical decision making for the geriatric patient. The summary gave PCPs "live texture" about what was happening outside the office and represented a significant improvement over other methodologies of information exchange. Prior to implementation into clinical practice, several refinements are necessary based on feedback including integration into the PCP's workflow. CONCLUSIONS:The template was viewed by PCPs as a concise and actionable record, in contrast to current communication which is characterized as "bloated"-containing too many pages on nonessential information. The summary could potentially save PCP's time in locating and analyzing historical data to enable rapid patient assessment and prompt more ready and informed action.

Introduction:Patient and family-centered rounds (PFCRs) are an important element of family-centered care often used in the inpatient pediatric setting. However, techniques and best practices vary, and faculty, trainees, nurses, and advanced care providers may not receive formal education in strategies that specifically enhance communication on PFCRs. Methods:Harnessing the use of structured communication, we developed the Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS Safer Communication on Rounds Every Time (SCORE) Program. The program uses a standardized framework for rounds communication via the I-PASS mnemonic, principles of health literacy, and techniques for patient/family engagement and bidirectional communication. The resident and advanced care provider training materials, a component of the larger SCORE Program, incorporate a flipped classroom approach as well as interactive exercises, simulations, and virtual learning options to optimize learning and retention via a 90-minute workshop. Results:Two hundred forty-six residents completed the training and were evaluated on their knowledge and confidence regarding key elements of the curriculum. Eighty-eight percent of residents agreed/strongly agreed that after training they could activate and engage families and all members of the interprofessional team to create a shared mental model; 90% agreed/strongly agreed that they could discuss the roles/responsibilities of various team members during PFCRs. Discussion:The Patient and Family-Centered I-PASS SCORE Program provides a structured framework for teaching advanced communication techniques that can improve provider knowledge of and confidence with engaging and communicating with patients/families and other members of the interprofessional team during PFCRs.

We present a hierarchical integrated model of self-regulation in which executive function is the cognitive component of the model, together with emotional, behavioral, physiological, and genetic components. These five components in the model are reciprocally and recursively related. The model is supported by empirical evidence, primarily from a single longitudinal study with good measurement at each level of the model. We also find that the model is consistent with current thinking on related topics such as cybernetic theory, the theory of allostasis and allostatic load, and the theory of skill development in harsh and unpredictable environments, referred to as "hidden talents." Next, we present literature that the integrative processes are susceptible to environmental adversity, poverty-related risk in particular, while positive social interactions with caregivers (e.g., maternal sensitivity) would promote self-regulatory processes or mitigate the adverse effect of early risk on the processes. A hierarchical integrative model of self-regulation advances our understanding of self-regulatory processes. Future research may consider broader social contexts of the integrative self-regulation system, such as neighborhood/community contexts and structural racism. This can be an integral step to provide children with equitable opportunities to thrive, even among children living in socioeconomically and psychosocially disadvantaged environments.

Background: We recently implemented the Age-Friendly Health System's 4Ms (What Matters, Medication, Mentation, and Mobility) framework in New York City Health + Hospitals/Bellevue Hospital Center's Geriatrics clinic to improve care of older adults.
Method(s): We examined the impact of 4Ms assessment on patient care and changes in care processes through specific interventions triggered after assessment. We conducted chart reviews of patient visits during March 2021, the first month of 4Ms implementation and identified interventions made during these visits. To assess "What Matters" providers asked "What Matters the most to you;" potentially inappropriate Medications (PIM) were identified using the Beers list; Mentation was evaluated using the Mini-Cog; and Mobility was determined using timed up and go (TUG) test. We used descriptive statistics to characterize findings.
Result(s): Among the 121 patients who had 4Ms assessment in March 2021, 85% (n=103) were asked "What Matters;" providers reviewed Medications for almost all (n=118; 98%) and conducted a Mini-Cog for 64% (n=78). Most not cognitively assessed were either previously screened (n=11; 9%) or had dementia (n=12; 10%). Providers used the TUG test for 87% (n=105). What Mattered to patients most commonly was "getting better" (n=24; 23%). There were 39 (33%) patients with potentially inappropriate Medications (including proton pump inhibitors, gabapentinoids, and NSAIDS) of which 10 (26%) Medications were either discontinued or reduced. Other interventions included further cognitive evaluation (n=2) and home care referrals (n=2) among 14 (18%) with an abnormal Mini- Cog. Among the 51 (42%) patients with an abnormal TUG, providers intervened for 19 (37%) with devices, referrals or home services.
Conclusion(s): The adoption of 4Ms assessment during routine visits identified issues with Medications, Mentation and Mobility, triggering several interventions for common geriatric conditions. 4Ms assessment is a helpful strategy to organize geriatric care, routinely assess patients for common geriatric syndromes, and improve care. Future directions include prioritizing interventions integrated with "What Matters" to maintain patient-centered care

Background: Neighborhood disadvantage influences health outcomes regardless of personal economic status, illustrating the importance of neighborhood context on health. The Area Deprivation index (ADI) establishes a ranking system of U.S. neighborhoods on state and national levels based on 17 neighborhood factors. Using data from an ongoing study of patients with dual diagnoses of diabetes and dementia, we investigated the relationship between ADI and diabetic outcomes, including glycemic control, blood pressure, and dementia severity.
Method(s): We conducted descriptive and bivariate statistics using 3 years of health record data from patients of NYU Langone Health. We included patients >=65 years, with ADRD and DM, and on DM medication. In addition to demographic measures and NY home addresses, we collected hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure, and assessed dementia severity, surveying proxies with the dementia severity rating scale (DSRS). We used ArcGIS and ADI data to link patient addresses to an ADI score. We stratified the sample into two groups: a low deprivation group with ADI scores 1-5, and a high deprivation group with ADI scores 6-10.
Result(s): Of those meeting inclusion criteria (n=996), most were over 75 years (73.5%), female (60.1%), white (71.2%), and not Hispanic or Latino (72.4%). Mean patient age was 81.3; standard deviation (SD): 7.6. More than 50% of patients had an NY state ADI score of 1, 2 or 3 out of 10, indicating that the majority of the population lived in neighborhoods of less disadvantage. 83.4% (n=831) of the population fell into the low deprivation group. There were no differences in hemoglobin A1c (7.09 vs. 7.01) or dementia severity (25.5 +/- 0.8 vs. 22.4 +/- 2.0) between low and high deprivation groups, respectively. However, systolic blood pressure was greater in high deprivation individuals (132.4 +/- 19.3 mm Hg vs. 128.6 +/- 18.2; p=0.02).
Conclusion(s): The ADI in this study was associated with blood pressure but not diabetic control or dementia severity. Less heterogeneity in disadvantage limited our ability to detect this potential social determinant of health. In a city, where neighborhood disadvantage changes from block to block, the influence of environment on health may be more difficult to detect

Background: Clinical trials are important to improve evidencebased care for persons living with dementia (PLWD) and for their care partners (dyads). Barriers to research recruitment are numerous, including care partners concerns' of ill health, cognitive impairment (CI) severity, and denial of need. The aim of this study is to determine whether a performance- or informant-based screening test for CI is associated with trial enrollment and whether mode of administration influences one's decision to participate.
Method(s): We used cross-sectional data from patients and caregivers who visited the EDs of New York University (NYU) and Indianapolis University (IU) during screening for the Program of Intensive Support in Emergency Departments (ED) for Care Partners of Cognitively Impaired Patients (POISED), which is testing a care management intervention. We offered CI screening to patients >75 years using the Mini-Cog and if unable to do this, we offered their care partners the Short Portable Informant Questionnaire of Cognitive Decline (IQ-CODE). We used chi-square tests and logistic regression to determine whether likelihood of enrollment differed between screening tests and mode of administration: in-person versus telephone.
Result(s): We screened 8860 patients or care partners (dyads) between 3/3/2018-4/1/2021, of which n=2840 at NYU and n=660 at IU had positive screens. Of these 3500 dyads, 2142 had a positive Mini-Cog (<2) and 1358 had a positive IQ-CODE (>3.40). We enrolled 13.9% (n=297) of positive Mini-Cogs and 14.5% (n=309) of positive in-person IQ-CODEs. During the pandemic we conducted all IQCODEs by phone and enrolled 34% (n=196) of those who screened positive. Adjusting for age, sex, and gender, compared to Mini-Cog screening, only those having positive IQCODES by phone were more likely to enroll (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 3.75 (95% CI: 2.76, 5.11).
Conclusion(s): Higher enrollment using informant-based telephone screening after discharge suggests that care partner recognition of a problem and perhaps having less distraction from the ED visit may increase trial enrollment. Whether the pandemic was the predomant factor encouraging enrollment is unknown