Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES:To determine whether lower serum albumin in community-dwelling, older adults is associated with increased risk of hospitalization and death independent of pre-existing disease. DESIGN:Prospective cohort study of participants in the fifth visit of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Baseline data were collected from 2011 to 2013. Follow-up was available to December 31, 2017. Replication was performed in Geisinger, a health system in rural Pennsylvania. SETTING:For ARIC, four US communities: Washington County, Maryland; Forsyth County, North Carolina; Jackson, Mississippi; and suburbs of Minneapolis, Minnesota. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 4947 community-dwelling men and women aged 66 to 90 years. EXPOSURE:Serum albumin. MAIN OUTCOMES:Incident all-cause hospitalization and death. RESULTS:Among the 4947 participants, mean age was 75.5 years (SD: 5.12) and mean baseline serum albumin concentration was 4.05 g/dL (SD: 0.30). Over a median follow-up period of 4.42 years (interquartile interval: 4.16-5.05), 553 participants (11.2%) died and 2457 participants (49.7%) were hospitalized at least once. The total number of hospitalizations was 5725. In analyses adjusted for demographics and numerous clinical characteristics, including tobacco use, obesity, frailty, cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, diabetes C-reactive protein (CRP), cognitive status, alcohol use, medication use, respiratory disease, and systolic blood pressure, 1 g/dL lower baseline serum albumin concentration was associated with higher risk of both hospitalization (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.36-1.82; p < 0.001) and death (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.24-2.24; p < 0.001). Associations were weaker with older age but not different by frailty status or level of high-sensitivity CRP. Associations between serum albumin, hospitalizations, and death were also similar in a real-world cohort of primary care patients. CONCLUSIONS:Lower baseline serum albumin was significantly associated with increased risk of both all-cause hospitalization and death, independent of pre-existing disease. Older adults with low serum albumin should be considered a high-risk population and targeted for interventions to reduce the risk of adverse outcomes.

BACKGROUND:While specific interventions have previously demonstrated benefit in patients with the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), use of these interventions is inconsistent, and patient mortality remains high. The impact of variability in center management practices on ARDS mortality rates remains unknown. RESEARCH QUESTION/OBJECTIVE:What is the impact of treatment variability on mortality in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS in the United States (US)? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS/METHODS:O, who were admitted to 29 US centers between October 1, 2016 and April 30, 2017. The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. Center variation in ventilator management, adjunctive therapy use, and mortality were also assessed. RESULTS:O) was 31.4% and varied between centers (0%-65%), as did rates of adjunctive therapy use (27.1%-96.4%), types of modalities used (neuromuscular blockade, prone positioning, systemic steroids, pulmonary vasodilators, and extracorporeal support), and mortality (16.7-73.3%). Center standardized mortality ratios (SMRs), calculated using baseline patient-level characteristics to derive expected mortality rate, ranged from 0.33 to 1.98. Of the treatment-level factors explored, only center adherence to early lung protective ventilation (LPV) was correlated with SMR. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Substantial center-to-center variability exists in ARDS management, suggesting that further opportunities for improving ARDS outcomes exist. Early adherence to LPV was associated with lower center mortality and may be a surrogate for overall quality of care processes. Future collaboration is needed to identify additional treatment-level factors influencing center-level outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03021824.

BACKGROUND:Infusion therapy refers to the intravenous administration of medicines and fluids for the treatment of status migrainosus, severe persistent headaches, or chronic headache. Headache practices and centers offer this treatment for patients as an alternative to the emergency department (ED) setting. However, little information is available in the literature on understanding the operations of an infusion center. OBJECTIVE:We sought to survey the Inpatient Headache & Emergency Medicine specialty section and the Academic Program Directors listserv of the American Headache Society (AHS) to better understand current practices. METHODS:A survey was advertised and distributed to the listservs of both the Inpatient Headache & Emergency Medicine specialty section and the Academic Program Directors, which combined included both academic and private practices. In addition, the survey was available on laptops at related events at an annual AHS meeting in Scottsdale. RESULTS:Of the 127 members of the combined group of both listservs, 50 responded with an overall survey response rate of 39%. Ten out of fifty were from programs with more than one responder completing the survey, leaving 40 unique headache programs. Academic programs made up the majority of programs (85%, 34/40). The total of 40 participating programs is comparable with the 47 academic headache programs listed on the American Migraine Foundation website at the time of the survey. Of the academic programs surveyed, most were hospital based (n = 23) compared with a satellite location (n = 11). Of all programs surveyed, 68% (27/40) offered infusion therapy. Of those that did not have an infusion practice (n = 13), the most common reason cited was insufficient staffing (n = 8). Key highlights of the survey included the following: The majority of programs offering infusions obtain prior authorization before scheduling (70%, 19/27) and offer patient availability 5 days/week (78%, 21/27) typically only during business hours (81%, 22/27). Programs reported that they typically give three to four medications during each infusion session (72%, 18/25). Treatment paradigms varied between programs. Programs surveyed were concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest regions of the United States. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The limited number of headache infusion centers overall may contribute to the limited ability of headache infusion centers to prevent ED migraine visits. Headache patients can have unpredictable headache onset, and most of the infusion practices surveyed appeared to adapt to this by offering infusions most days during a work week. However, this need for multiple days per week may also explain the most common reason for not having an infusion practice, which is insufficient staffing. Various treatment paradigms are implemented by different practitioners, and future studies will have to focus on investigation of best practice.

OBJECTIVE:To characterize the general health status of infertile men in the United States using a nationally representative sample of men. METHODS:Using the National Survey for Family Growth from 2011 to 2017, infertile subgroups were created using a range of inclusion criteria. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted comparing these men to fertile men. RESULTS:Using population estimates, 6.5 million men with reduced fertility potential were compared to 26 million fertile men. After controlling for demographic and healthcare utilization factors, these groups did not have significantly different rates of key medical co-morbidities, including cancer, obesity, and overall disability. Looking at the subset of men who had received a specific infertility diagnosis, estimated as a population of nearly 600,000 men, this pattern held, in that there were no significant differences in the rates of medical co-morbidities. Notably, the rate of male infertility evaluation among potentially infertile men was only 50%. These findings also persisted after a propensity-matched analysis. CONCLUSIONS:In this cohort, there was no significant relationship between infertility and specific medical co-morbidities. We must consider the influence of sample selection as we continue to investigate the relationship between medical co-morbidities and reduced fertility potential. Given the persistent low rates of infertility evaluation, even among men who seek medical advice to conceive, we must continue to search for ways to characterize the infertile male population while simultaneously working to improve access.

INTRODUCTION:In ED patients with acute drug overdose involving prescription medication and/or substances of abuse, severe QTc prolongation (> 500 ms) is predictive of adverse cardiovascular events (ACVE), defined as myocardial injury, ventricular dysrhythmia, shock, or cardiac arrest. However, it is unclear whether delayed severe QTc prolongation (dsQTp) is a risk factor for ACVE and if specific clinical factors are associated with occurrence of dsQTp. METHODS:A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of consecutive adult ED patients with acute drug overdose was performed on patients with initial QTc < 500 ms. The predictor variable, dsQTp, was defined as initial QTc < 500 ms followed by repeat QTc ≥ 500 ms. The primary outcome was occurrence of ACVE. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to test whether dsQTp was an independent predictor of ACVE and to derive clinical factors associated with dsQTp. RESULTS:Of 2311 patients screened, 1648 patients were included. The dsQTp group (N = 27) was older than the control group (N = 1621) (51.6 vs 40.2, p < 0.001) and had a higher number of drug exposures (2.92 vs 2.16, p = 0.003). Following adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity, number of exposures, serum potassium, and opioid exposure, dsQTp remained an independent predictor of ACVE (aOR: 12.44, p < 0.0001). Clinical factors associated with dsQTp were age > 45 years and polydrug (≥ 3) overdoses. CONCLUSION:In this large secondary analysis of ED patients with acute drug overdose, dsQTp was an independent risk factor for in-hospital occurrence of ACVE.

STUDY OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Input from adolescents and healthcare providers is needed to develop electronic tools that can support patient-centered sexual and reproductive (SRH) care. This study explores facilitators and barriers to patient-centered communication in the context of developing an electronic appointment planning tool to promote SRH communication in clinic settings. DESIGN/METHODS:In-depth interviews were conducted to explore what constitutes adolescent-friendly SRH care and communication, as well as on the design of the appointment planning tool. Interviews were coded iteratively, and analyzed using the software Atlas.TI v8. SETTING/METHODS:An adolescent primary care clinic, and a pediatric and adolescent gynecology clinic. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Adolescent girls (N=32; ages 14-18) and providers who care for adolescent girls (N=10). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Thematic analyses explored facilitators/barriers to SRH communication and care and preferences for the tool. RESULTS:Facilitators identified by adolescents and providers included: direct patient/provider communication; adolescent-driven decision-making regarding care and contraceptive choice; supplementing clinic visits with electronic resources; and holistic care addressing physical, mental, and social needs. Barriers identified by participants included: limited time for appointments; limited adolescent autonomy in appointments; and poor continuity of care when adolescents cannot see the same provider. Given the complexity of issues raised, adolescents and providers were interested in developing an appointment planning tool to guide communication during appointments, and contributed input on its design. The resulting Appointment Planning Tool app pilot is in progress. CONCLUSIONS:Qualitative interviews with adolescents and providers offer critical insights for the development and implementation of mobile health (mHealth) tools that can foster patient-centered care.

Maintaining influenza vaccination at high coverage has the potential to prevent a proportion of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. We examined whether flu-vaccination is associated with severe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease, as measured by intensive care unit (ICU)-admission, ventilator-use, and mortality. Other outcome measures included hospital length of stay and total ICU days. Our findings showed that flu-vaccination was associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of an ICU admission especially among aged <65 and non-obese patients. Public health promotion of flu-vaccination may help mitigate the overwhelming demand for critical COVID-19 care pending the large-scale availability of COVID-19 vaccines.

INTRODUCTION:Hearing impairment is associated with poor cognitive test performance in older adults. However, hearing's impact on cognitive test completion is poorly described, and missing cognitive data due to hearing impairment could misestimate the association. METHODS:We investigated if hearing impairment is associated with missing neurocognitive scores in 3678 adults (72-94 years). Hearing impairment was defined by the better-ear pure tone average of speech-frequency thresholds (0.5-4 kHz) >25 decibels. RESULTS:Hearing impairment was associated with greater missingness on all auditory-only tests, including Logical Memory (prevalence ratio [PR] comparing ≥ moderate impairment vs normal hearing:1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26, 2.25) and Digits Backwards (PR 1.62; 95% CI 1.21, 2.17); and two non-auditory tests, Boston Naming (PR 1.61; 95% CI 1.21, 2.17) and Trail Making B (PR 1.55; 95% CI 1.29, 1.86). Models that imputed missing cognitive scores showed the strongest hearing-cognition associations. DISCUSSION:Older adults with hearing impairment are less likely to complete cognitive testing, thereby underestimating the hearing impairment-cognition relationship.

Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) provide primary care services in underserved areas and are governed by patient-majority boards. A phenomenological approach was used to explore the lived experiences of board members as they addressed the need for fundamental change to meet the demands of a rapidly changing, highly competitive health care market (2010-2020). Findings were that board members rely upon personal experience and monthly board meetings to be alerted to change that affects health care delivery. They may need additional training to adjust governance and organizational performance to address the new patient consumerism, market conditions, and competition from other providers.