Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To assess parent decision-making regarding dosing tools, a known contributor to medication dosing errors, by evaluating parent dosing tool use, beliefs, and access, and the role of health literacy, with a focus on dosing cups, which are associated with an increased risk of multifold overdose. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Cross-sectional analysis of data collected for randomized controlled study in 3 urban pediatric clinics. English/Spanish-speaking parents (n = 493) of children ≤8 years of age enrolled. OUTCOMES/RESULTS:reported tool use, beliefs, and access. Predictor variable: health literacy (Newest Vital Sign; limited [0-3], adequate [4-6]). Multiple logistic regression analyses conducted. RESULTS:Over two-thirds of parents had limited health literacy. Oral syringes (62%) and dosing cups (22%) were most commonly used. Overall, 24% believed dosing cups were the best tool type for dosing accuracy; 99% reported having access to ≥1 dosing tools with standard measurement markings. Parents with limited health literacy had greater odds of dosing cup use (limited vs adequate: aOR = 2.4 [1.2-4.6]). Parents who believed that dosing cups are best for accuracy had greater odds of dosing cup use (aOR = 16.3 [9.0-29.3]); this belief mediated health literacy-effects on dosing cup use. CONCLUSIONS:Factors associated with dosing tool choice, including parent health literacy and beliefs are important to consider in the design of interventions to reduce dosing errors; future larger-scale studies addressing this issue are needed.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Many older survivors of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) experience functional decline, an outcome of primary importance to older adults. Mobility impairment has been proposed as a risk factor for functional decline but has not been evaluated to date in older patients hospitalized for AMI. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To examine the association of mobility impairment, measured during hospitalization, as a risk marker for functional decline among older patients with AMI. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:Prospective cohort study among 94 academic and community hospitals in the United States. Participants were 2587 hospitalized patients with AMI who were 75 years or older. The study dates were January 2013 to June 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Mobility was evaluated during AMI hospitalization using the Timed "Up and Go," with scores categorized as preserved mobility (≤15 seconds to complete), mild impairment (>15 to ≤25 seconds to complete), moderate impairment (>25 seconds to complete), and severe impairment (unable to complete). Self-reported function in activities of daily living (ADLs) (bathing, dressing, transferring, and walking around the home) and walking 0.4 km (one-quarter mile) was assessed at baseline and 6 months after discharge. The primary outcomes were worsening of 1 or more ADLs and loss of ability to walk 0.4 km from baseline to 6 months after discharge. The association between mobility impairment and risk of functional decline was evaluated with multivariable-adjusted logistic regression. Results/UNASSIGNED:Among 2587 hospitalized patients with AMI, the mean (SD) age was 81.4 (4.8) years, and 1462 (56.5%) were male. More than half of the cohort exhibited mobility impairment during AMI hospitalization (21.8% [564 of 2587] had mild impairment, 16.0% [414 of 2587] had moderate impairment, and 15.2% [391 of 2587] had severe impairment); 12.8% (332 of 2587) reported ADL decline, and 16.7% (431 of 2587) reported decline in 0.4-km mobility. Only 3.8% (30 of 800) of participants with preserved mobility experienced any ADL decline compared with 6.9% (39 of 564) of participants with mild impairment (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.24; 95% CI, 0.74-2.09), 18.6% (77 of 414) of participants with moderate impairment (aOR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.67-4.27), and 34.7% (136 of 391) of participants with severe impairment (aOR, 5.45; 95% CI, 3.29-9.01). Eleven percent (90 of 800) of participants with preserved mobility declined in ability to walk 0.4 km compared with 15.2% (85 of 558) of participants with mild impairment (aOR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.04-2.20), 19.0% (78 of 411) of participants with moderate impairment (aOR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.37-3.02), and 24.6% (95 of 386) of participants with severe impairment (aOR, 3.25; 95% CI, 2.02-5.23). Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:This study's findings suggest that mobility impairment assessed during hospitalization may be a potent risk marker for functional decline in older survivors of AMI. These findings also suggest that brief, validated assessments of mobility should be part of the care of older hospitalized patients with AMI to identify those at risk for this important patient-centered outcome.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Health care may be burdensome and of uncertain benefit for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). Aligning health care with an individual's health priorities may improve outcomes and reduce burden. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate whether patient priorities care (PPC) is associated with a perception of more goal-directed and less burdensome care compared with usual care (UC). Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:Nonrandomized clinical trial with propensity adjustment conducted at 1 PPC and 1 UC site of a Connecticut multisite primary care practice that provides care to almost 15% of the state's residents. Participants included 163 adults aged 65 years or older who had 3 or more chronic conditions cared for by 10 primary care practitioners (PCPs) trained in PPC and 203 similar patients who received UC from 7 PCPs not trained in PPC. Participant enrollment occurred between February 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018; follow-up extended for up to 9 months (ended September 30, 2018). Interventions/UNASSIGNED:Patient priorities care, an approach to decision-making that includes patients' identifying their health priorities (ie, specific health outcome goals and health care preferences) and clinicians aligning their decision-making to achieve these health priorities. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Primary outcomes included change in patients' Older Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (O-PACIC), CollaboRATE, and Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) scores; electronic health record documentation of decision-making based on patients' health priorities; medications and self-management tasks added or stopped; and diagnostic tests, referrals, and procedures ordered or avoided. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of the 366 patients, 235 (64.2%) were female and 350 (95.6%) were white. Compared with the UC group, the PPC group was older (mean [SD] age, 74.7 [6.6] vs 77.6 [7.6] years) and had lower physical and mental health scores. At follow-up, PPC participants reported a 5-point greater decrease in TBQ score than those who received UC (ß [SE], -5.0 [2.04]; P = .01) using a weighted regression model with inverse probability of PCP assignment weights; no differences were seen in O-PACIC or CollaboRATE scores. Health priorities-based decisions were mentioned in clinical visit notes for 108 of 163 (66.3%) PPC vs 0 of 203 (0%) UC participants. Compared with UC patients, PPC patients were more likely to have medications stopped (weighted comparison, 52.0% vs 33.8%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.05; 95% CI, 1.43-2.95) and less likely to have self-management tasks (57.5% vs 62.1%; AOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84) and diagnostic tests (80.8% vs 86.4%; AOR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.40) ordered. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:This study's findings suggest that patient priorities care may be associated with reduced treatment burden and unwanted health care. Care aligned with patients' priorities may be feasible and effective for older adults with MCCs. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03600389.

KEY MESSAGES eHealth should support the transition towards personalized medicine, self-management and shared decisions in primary care. Several conditions need to be met to ensure that eHealth applications are safe, evidence-based and of high quality. Innovative but valid research methodology-e.g. adaptive (action research) designs-is a prerequisite for ongoing success and sustainability of eHealth. Primary care is challenged to provide high quality, accessible and affordable care for an increasingly ageing, complex, and multimorbid population. To counter these challenges, primary care professionals need to take up new and innovative practices, including eHealth. eHealth applications hold the promise to overcome some difficulties encountered in the care of people with complex medical and social needs in primary care. However, many unanswered questions regarding (cost) effectiveness, integration with healthcare, and acceptability to patients, caregivers, and professionals remain to be elucidated. What conditions need to be met? What challenges need to be overcome? What downsides must be dealt with? This first paper in a series on eHealth in primary care introduces basic concepts and examines opportunities for the uptake of eHealth in primary care. We illustrate that although the potential of eHealth in primary care is high, several conditions need to be met to ensure that safe and high-quality eHealth is developed for and implemented in primary care. eHealth research needs to be optimized; ensuring evidence-based eHealth is available. Blended care, i.e. combining face-to-face care with remote options, personalized to the individual patient should be considered. Stakeholders need to be involved in the development and implementation of eHealth via co-creation processes, and design should be mindful of vulnerable groups and eHealth illiteracy. Furthermore, a global perspective on eHealth should be adopted, and eHealth ethics, patients' safety and privacy considered.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Decades of persecution culminated in a statewide campaign of organized, systematic, and violent eviction of the Rohingya people by the Myanmar government beginning in August 2017. These attacks included the burning of homes and farms, beatings, shootings, sexual violence, summary executions, burying the dead in mass graves, and other atrocities. The Myanmar government has denied any responsibility. To document evidence of reported atrocities and identify patterns, we interviewed survivors, documented physical injuries, and assessed for consistency in their reports. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We use purposive and snowball sampling to identify survivors residing in refugee camps in Bangladesh. Interviews and examinations were conducted by trained investigators with the assistance of interpreters based on the Istanbul Protocol - the international standard to investigate and document instances of torture and other cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. The goal was to assess whether the clinical findings corroborate survivors' narratives and to identify emblematic patterns. Results/UNASSIGNED:During four separate field visits between December 2017 and July 2018, we interviewed and where relevant, conducted physical examinations on a total of 114 refugees. The participants came from 36 villages in Northern Rakhine state; 36 (32%) were female, 26 (23%) were children. Testimonies described several patterns in the violence prior to their flight, including the organization of the attacks, the involvement of non-Rohingya civilians, the targeted and purposeful destruction of homes and eviction of Rohingya residents, and the denial of medical care. Physical findings included injuries from gunshots, blunt trauma, penetrating trauma such as slashings and mutilations, burns, and explosives and from sexual and gender-based violence. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:While each survivor's experience was unique, similarities in the types and organization of attacks support allegations of a systematic, widespread, and premeditated campaign of forced displacement and violence. Physical findings were consistent with survivors' narratives of violence and brutality. These findings warrant accountability for the Myanmar military per the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has jurisdiction to try individuals for serious international crimes, including crimes against humanity and genocide. Legal accountability for these crimes should be pursued along with medical and psychological care and rehabilitation to address the ongoing effects of violence, discrimination, and displacement.

Air quality data from satellites and low-cost sensor systems, together with output from air quality models, have the potential to augment high-quality, regulatory-grade data in countries with in situ monitoring networks and provide much-needed air quality information in countries without them. Each of these technologies has strengths and limitations that need to be considered when integrating them to develop a robust and diverse global air quality monitoring network. To address these issues, the American Thoracic Society, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences convened a workshop in May 2017 to bring together global experts from across multiple disciplines and agencies to discuss current and near-term capabilities to monitor global air pollution. The participants focused on four topics: 1) current and near-term capabilities in air pollution monitoring, 2) data assimilation from multiple technology platforms, 3) critical issues for air pollution monitoring in regions without a regulatory-quality stationary monitoring network, and 4) risk communication and health messaging. Recommendations for research and improved use were identified during the workshop, including a recognition that the integration of data across monitoring technology groups is critical to maximizing the effectiveness (e.g., data accuracy, as well as spatial and temporal coverage) of these monitoring technologies. Taken together, these recommendations will advance the development of a global air quality monitoring network that takes advantage of emerging technologies to ensure the availability of free, accessible, and reliable air pollution data and forecasts to health professionals, as well as to all global citizens.

BACKGROUND:Injury care involves the complex interaction of patient, physician, and environment that impacts patient complications, level of harm, and failure to rescue (FTR). FTR represents the likelihood of a hospital to be unable to rescue patients from death after in-hospital complications. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to hypothesize that error type and number of errors contribute to increased level of harm and FTR. METHODS:Patient information was abstracted from weekly trauma performance improvement (PI) records (from January 1, 2016, to July 19, 2017), where trauma surgeons determined the level of harm and identified the factors associated with complications. Level of harm was determined by definitions set forth by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Logistic regression was used to determine the impact of individual factors on FTR and level of harm, controlling for age, gender, Charlson score, injury severity score (ISS), error (in diagnosis, technique, or judgment), delay (in diagnosis or intervention), and need for surgery. RESULTS:A total of 2216 trauma patients presented during the study period. Of 2216 patients, 224 (224/2216, 10.10 %) had complications reported at PI meetings; of these, 31 patients (31/224, 13.8 %) had FTR. PI patients were more likely to be older (mean age 51.3 years, SE 1.58, vs 46.5 years, SE 0.51; P=.008) and have higher ISS (median 22 vs 8; P<.001), compared with patients without complications. Physician-attributable errors (odds ratio [OR] 2.82; P=.001), most commonly errors in technique, and nature of injury (OR 1.91; P=.01) were associated with higher levels of harm, whereas delays in diagnosis or intervention were not. Each additional factor involved increased level of harm (OR 2.09; P<.001) and nearly doubled likelihood of FTR (OR 1.95; P=.01). CONCLUSIONS:Physician-attributable errors in diagnosis, technique, or judgment are more strongly correlated with harm than delays in diagnosis and intervention. Increasing number of errors identified in patient care correlates with an increasing level of harm and FTR.

BACKGROUND:Few studies have documented patient attitudes and experiences with extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) opioid relapse prevention in criminal justice settings. This study assessed barriers and facilitators of jail-to-community reentry among adults with opioid use disorder (OUD) treated with XR-NTX, buprenorphine, methadone, and no medications. METHODS:This qualitative study conducted individual interviews with a purposeful and convenience sample of adults with OUD who were recently released from NYC jails. XR-NTX, no medication, and methadone participants were concurrently enrolled in a large randomized controlled trial evaluating XR-NTX vs. a no medication Enhanced Treatment As Usual (ETAU) condition, or enrolled in a non-randomized quasi-experimental methadone maintenance cohort. Buprenorphine participants were referred from NYC jails to a public hospital office-based buprenorphine program and not enrolled in the parent trial. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, independently coded by two researchers, and analyzed per a grounded theory approach adapted to the Social Cognitive Theory framework. The research team reviewed transcripts and coding to reach consensus on emergent themes. RESULTS:N = 33 adults with OUD (28 male, 5 female) completed a single individual interview. Purposeful sampling recruited persons leaving jail on XR-NTX (n = 11), no active medication treatment (n = 9), methadone (n = 9), and buprenorphine (n = 4). Emergent themes were: (1) general satisfaction with XR-NTX's long-acting antagonist effects and control of cravings; (2) "testing" XR-NTX's blockade with heroin upon reentry was common; (3) early discontinuation of XR-NTX treatment was most common among persons with high self-efficacy and/or heavy exposure to drug use environments and peers; (4) similar satisfaction regarding effects of methadone and buprenorphine maintenance among retained-in-treatment individuals, alongside general dissatisfaction with daily observed dosing requirements and misinformation and stigmas regarding methadone adverse effects; (5) unstable housing, economic insecurity, and exposure to actively using peers were attributed to early termination of treatment and relapse; (6) individual motivation and willpower as central to long-term opioid abstinence and reentry success. CONCLUSIONS:In the context of more familiar agonist maintenance treatments, XR-NTX relapse prevention during jail-to-community reentry was viewed as a helpful and unique intervention though with important limitations. Commonly described barriers to treatment retention and heroin abstinence included homelessness, economic insecurity, and drug-using peers. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01999946 (XOR), Registered 03 December 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01999946 .