Analysis of Hospitals Switching From a "Danger to Self" Question to Universal Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale Screening: Impact on Screenings, Identification of Suicide Risk, and Documented Psychiatric Care.

Objective: Sutter Health launched system-wide general population standardized suicide screening with the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) screen (triage) version in 23 hospitals in 2019, replacing a one-question "danger to self" (DTS) assessment. This study analyzed the impact of C-SSRS implementation on screening rates, positive screenings, and documented psychiatric care within 90 days for all patients and a subgroup diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Methods: Adults seen at hospitals in the pre-period (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2019) and post-period (July 1, 2019-December 31, 2020) were identified using electronic health records. Outcomes were compared using chi-square statistics and interrupted time series (ITS) models. Results: Pre-period, 92.8% (740,984/798,653) of patients were screened by DTS versus 84.6% (504,015/595,915) by C-SSRS in the post-period. Positive screening rates were 1.5% pre-period and 2.2% post-period, and 9.2% pre-period versus 10.8% post-period for those with MDD. Among individuals with positive screenings, 64.0% (pre-period) had documented follow-up psychiatric care versus 52.5% post-period and 66.4% of those with moderate or high-risk. Among all patients seen there was an overall increase in documentation of psychiatric care within 90 days (0.87% pre- to 0.96% post-period). ITS models revealed a 9.6% decline in screening, 1.3% increase in positive screenings, and 12.9% decline in documented psychiatric care following C-SSRS implementation (all p < 0.01). Conclusions: Following implementation, there was meaningful increase in suicide risk identification, and an increase in the proportion of patients with documented psychiatric care. Observed relative declines in screening warrant future research examining opportunities and barriers to general population C-SSRS use.

Temporal Trends in Cardiovascular Disease Prevalence Among Asian American Subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Asian and multiracial individuals represent the 2 fastest growing racial and ethnic groups in the United States, yet most prior studies report Asian American and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander as a single racial group, with limited data on cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevalence among subgroups. We sought to evaluate temporal trends in CVD burden among disaggregated Asian subgroups. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with CVD based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision (ICD-9 and ICD-10) coding who received care from a mixed-payer health care organization in California between 2008 and 2018 were classified into self-identified racial and ethnic subgroups (non-Hispanic White [NHW], Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and multiracial groups). Adjusted trends in CVD prevalence over time by subgroup were compared using logistic regression. Among 3 494 071 patient-years, prevalence of CVD increased faster among all subgroups except Japanese and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander patients (P<0.01 for each, reference: NHW). Filipino patients had the highest overall CVD prevalence, which increased from 34.3% to 45.1% over 11 years (increase from 17.3%-21.9%, P<0.0001, reference: NHW). Asian Indian patients had the fastest increase in CVD prevalence over time (16.9%-23.7%, P<0.0001, reference: NHW). Among subcategories of disease, hypertension increased faster among Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Korean, and multiracial groups (P<0.01 for all, reference: NHW), and coronary artery disease increased faster among Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, and Japanese groups (P<0.05 for each, reference: NHW). CONCLUSIONS: The increasing prevalence of CVD among disaggregated Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and multiracial subgroups over time highlights the importance of tailored approaches to addressing CVD in these diverse subpopulations.

Homelessness Among Acute Care Patients Within a Large Health Care System in Northern California.

The impacts of homelessness on health and health care access are detrimental. Intervention and efforts to improve outcomes and increase availability of affordable housing have mainly originated from the public health sector and government. The role that large community-based health systems may play has yet to be established. This study characterizes patients self-identified as homeless in acute care facilities in a large integrated health care system in Northern California to inform the development of collaborative interventions addressing unmet needs of this vulnerable population. The authors compared sociodemographic characteristics, clinical conditions, and health care utilization of individuals who did and did not self-identify as homeless and characterized their geographical distribution in relation to Sutter hospitals and homeless resources. Between July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2020, 5% (N = 20,259) of the acute care settings patients had evidence of homelessness, among which 51.1% age <45 years, 66.4% males, and 24% non-Hispanic Black. Patients experiencing homelessness had higher emergency department utilization and lower utilization of outpatient and urgent care services. Mental health conditions were more common among patients experiencing homelessness. More than half of the hospitals had >5% of patients who identified as homeless. Some hospitals with higher proportions of patients experiencing homelessness are not located near many shelter resources. By understanding patients who self-identify as homeless, it is possible to assess the role of the health system in addressing their unmet needs. Accurate identification is the first step for the health systems to develop and deliver better solutions through collaborations with nonprofit organizations, community partners, and government agencies.

Performance Characteristics of Sepsis Screening Tools During Antepartum and Postpartum Admissions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance characteristics of existing screening tools for the prediction of sepsis during antepartum and postpartum readmissions. METHODS: This was a case-control study using electronic health record data obtained between 2016 and 2021 from 67 hospitals for antepartum sepsis admissions and 71 hospitals for postpartum readmissions up to 42 days. Patients in the sepsis case group were matched in a 1:4 ratio to a comparison cohort of patients without sepsis admitted antepartum or postpartum. The following screening criteria were evaluated: the CMQCC (California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative) initial sepsis screen, the non-pregnancy-adjusted SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome), the MEWC (Maternal Early Warning Criteria), UKOSS (United Kingdom Obstetric Surveillance System) obstetric SIRS, and the MEWT (Maternal Early Warning Trigger Tool). Time periods were divided into early pregnancy (less than 20 weeks of gestation), more than 20 weeks of gestation, early postpartum (less than 3 days postpartum), and late postpartum through 42 days. False-positive screening rates, C-statistics, sensitivity, and specificity were reported for each overall screening tool and each individual criterion. RESULTS: We identified 525 patients with sepsis during an antepartum hospitalization and 728 patients with sepsis during a postpartum readmission. For early pregnancy and more than 3 days postpartum, non-pregnancy-adjusted SIRS had the highest C-statistics (0.78 and 0.83, respectively). For more than 20 weeks of gestation and less than 3 days postpartum, the pregnancy-adjusted sepsis screening tools (CMQCC and UKOSS) had the highest C-statistics (0.87-0.94). The MEWC maintained the highest sensitivity rates during all time periods (81.9-94.4%) but also had the highest false-positive rates (30.4-63.9%). The pregnancy-adjusted sepsis screening tools (CMQCC, UKOSS) had the lowest false-positive rates in all time periods (3.9-10.1%). All tools had the lowest C-statistics in the periods of less than 20 weeks of gestation and more than 3 days postpartum. CONCLUSION: For admissions early in pregnancy and more than 3 days postpartum, non-pregnancy-adjusted sepsis screening tools performed better than pregnancy-adjusted tools. From 20 weeks of gestation through up to 3 days postpartum, using a pregnancy-adjusted sepsis screening tool increased sensitivity and minimized false-positive rates. The overall false-positive rate remained high.

Performance Characteristics of Sepsis Screening Tools During Delivery Admissions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the screening performance characteristics of existing tools for the diagnosis of sepsis during delivery admissions. METHODS: This was a case-control study using electronic health record data, including vital signs and laboratory results, for all delivery admissions of patients with sepsis from 59 nationally distributed hospitals. Patients with sepsis were matched by gestational age at delivery in a 1:4 ratio with patients without sepsis to create a comparison group. Patients with chorioamnionitis and sepsis were compared with a complete cohort of patients with chorioamnionitis without sepsis. Multiple screening criteria for sepsis were evaluated: the CMQCC (California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative), SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome), the MEWC (the Maternal Early Warning Criteria), UKOSS (United Kingdom Obstetric Surveillance System), and the MEWT (Maternal Early Warning Trigger Tool). Sensitivity, false-positive rates, and C-statistics were reported for each screening tool. Analyses were stratified into cohort 1, which excluded patients with chorioamnionitis-endometritis, and cohort 2, which included those patients. RESULTS: Delivery admissions at 59 hospitals were extracted for patients with sepsis. Cohort 1 comprised 647 patients with sepsis, including 228 with end-organ injury, matched with a control group of 2,588 patients without sepsis. Cohort 2 comprised 14,591 patients with chorioamnionitis-endometritis, of whom 1,049 had sepsis and 238 had end-organ injury. In cohort 1, the CMQCC and the UKOSS pregnancy-adjusted criteria had the lowest false-positive rates (6.9% and 9.6%, respectively) and the highest C-statistics (0.92 and 0.91, respectively). Although other screening criteria, such as SIRS and the MEWC, had similar sensitivities, it was at the cost of much higher false-positive rates (21.3% and 38.3%, respectively). In cohort 2, including all patients with chorioamnionitis-endometritis, the highest C-statistics were again for the CMQCC (0.67) and UKOSS (0.64). All screening tools had high false-positive rates, but the false-positive rates for the CMQCC and UKOSS were substantially lower than those for SIRS and the MEWC. CONCLUSION: During delivery admissions, the CMQCC and UKOSS pregnancy-adjusted screening criteria have the lowest false-positive results while maintaining greater than 90% sensitivity rates. Performance of all screening tools was degraded in the setting of chorioamnionitis-endometritis.

Changes in Healthcare Utilization After Lifestyle Intervention for Weight Loss.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluates the real-world impact of a lifestyle change program (LCP) on healthcare utilization in a large health system. METHODS: Using electronic health record data from a large health system in northern California, U.S., LCP participant and propensity-score-matched nonparticipant outcomes were compared in the second year post-participation: (1) overall healthcare utilization and (2) utilization and medications related to cardiometabolic conditions and obesity. Adult LCP participants between 2010 and 2017 were identified and matched 1:1 with replacement to comparable nonparticipants. Participants without electronic health record activity in the 12-36 months before baseline, or with conditions or procedures associated with substantial weight change, were excluded. Statistical analysis and modeling were performed in 2021-22. RESULTS: Compared to matched nonparticipants, LCP participants in the 12-24 months post-baseline were more likely to have specialty-care visits (+4.7%, 95% CI +1.8%, +7.6%), electronic communications (8.6%, 95% CI +5.6%, +11.7%), and urgent-care visits (+6.5%, 95% CI +3.0%, 10.0%). Participants also had more office visits for cardiometabolic conditions and obesity (+1.72 visits/patient, 95% CI +1.05, +2.39). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with matched nonparticipants, LCP participation was associated with higher utilization of outpatient services post-participation. Additional research could assess whether this indicates an increase in preventive care that could lead to improved future outcomes.

Examining paradoxical session attendance and weight loss relationships in a clinic based lifestyle modification intervention.

Objective: Evaluations of lifestyle modification interventions (LMIs), modeled after the Diabetes Prevention Program, have repeatedly shown a dose-response relationship between session attendance and weight loss. Despite this, not all participants had "average" weight loss experiences. Nearly one-third of LMI participants experienced unexpected, paradoxical outcomes (i.e., high attendance with little weight loss, and low attendance with clinically significant weight loss). Paradoxical weight-loss outcomes were characterized based on session attendance among participants in a group-based LMI in a real-world healthcare setting. This group-based LMI was delivered over 1 year to participants with the possibility of attending up to 25 sessions total. Methods: LMI participants identified in 2010-2017 from electronic health records were characterized as having low (<75%) or high (≥75%) session attendance. Weight-loss outcomes were defined as expected (≥5%, high-attendance; <5%, low-attendance) or paradoxical (≥5%, low-attendance; <5%, high-attendance). Paradoxical-outcome-associated characteristics were identified using logistic regression. Results: Among 1813 LMI participants, 1498 (82.6%) had low and 315 (17.4%) high session attendance; 555 (30.6%) had paradoxical outcomes, comprising 415 (74.8%) responders (≥5% weight-loss) and 140 (25.2%) non-responders (<5% weight-loss). Among participants with high session attendance, paradoxical non-responders were more likely to be female (odds ratio [OR]: 2.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32, 5.77) and have type 2 diabetes (OR: 3.32; 95% CI: 1.01, 10.95). Among low-attendance participants, paradoxical responders were more likely to be non-Hispanic White and less likely to be non-Hispanic Black (OR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.69), non-Hispanic Asian (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.22, 0.73), or Hispanic (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.80). Conclusions: In a healthcare setting, nearly one-third of LMI participants experienced paradoxical outcomes. More research is needed to understand the facilitators and barriers to weight loss above and beyond session attendance.

Learning health system, positive deviance analysis, and electronic health records: Synergy for a learning health system.

Introduction: Over the past decade, numerous efforts have encouraged the realization of the learning health system (LHS) in the United States. Despite these efforts, and promising aims of the LHS, the full potential and value of research conducted within LHSs have yet to be realized. New technology coupled with a catalyzing global pandemic have spurred momentum. In addition, the LHS has lacked a consistent framework within which "best evidence" can be identified. Positive deviance analysis, itself reinvigorated by recent advances in health information technology (IT) and ubiquitous adoption of electronic health records (EHRs), may finally provide a framework through which LHSs can be operationalized and optimized. Methods: We describe the synergy between positive deviance and the LHS and how they may be integrated to achieve a continuous cycle of health system improvement. Results: As we describe below, the positive deviance approach focuses on learning from high-performing teams and organizations. Conclusion: Such learning can be enabled by EHRs and health IT, providing a lens into how digital clinical interventions are successfully developed and deployed.

Racial and sociodemographic predictors of COVID-19 compared with influenza, appendicitis, and all-cause hospitalization: retrospective cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether inequities in COVID-19 infection and hospitalization differ from those for common medical conditions: influenza, appendicitis, and all-cause hospitalization. DESIGN: Retrospective study based on electronic health records of three healthcare systems in San Francisco (university, public, and community) examining (1) racial/ethnic distribution in cases and hospitalization among patients with diagnosed COVID-19 (March-August 2020) and patients with diagnosed influenza, diagnosed appendicitis, or all-cause hospitalization (August 2017-March 2020), and (2) sociodemographic predictors of hospitalization among those with diagnosed COVID-19 and influenza. RESULTS: Patients 18 years or older with diagnosed COVID-19 (N = 3934), diagnosed influenza (N = 5932), diagnosed appendicitis (N = 1235), or all-cause hospitalization (N = 62,707) were included in the study. The age-adjusted racial/ethnic distribution of patients with diagnosed COVID-19 differed from that of patients with diagnosed influenza or appendicitis for all healthcare systems, as did hospitalization from these conditions compared to any cause. For example, in the public healthcare system, 68% of patients with diagnosed COVID-19 were Latine, compared with 43% of patients with diagnosed influenza, and 48% of patients with diagnosed appendicitis (p < 0.05). In multivariable logistic regressions, COVID-19 hospitalizations were associated with male sex, Asian and Pacific Islander race/ethnicity, Spanish language, and public insurance in the university healthcare system, and Latine race/ethnicity and obesity in the community healthcare system. Influenza hospitalizations were associated with Asian and Pacific Islander and other race/ethnicity in the university healthcare system, obesity in the community healthcare system, and Chinese language and public insurance in both the university and community healthcare systems. CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic and sociodemographic inequities in diagnosed COVID-19 and hospitalization differed from those for diagnosed influenza and other medical conditions, with consistently higher odds among Latine and Spanish-speaking patients. This work highlights the need for disease-specific public health efforts in at-risk communities in addition to structural upstream interventions.

Lifestyle change program engagement in real-world clinical practice: a mixed-methods analysis.

Participant engagement in structured lifestyle change programs (LCPs) is essential for adopting behaviors that promote weight loss; however, the challenges to, and facilitators that promote, engagement with such programs are not well understood. We conducted a mixed-methods study among real-world LCP participants to assess factors associated with program engagement and to examine the reasons for withdrawal. Using electronic health records (EHR), we identified LCP eligible participants between 2010 and 2017. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations between program engagement and baseline characteristics. Semi-structured interviews with LCP participants were conducted and thematically analyzed to examine reasons for withdrawal. A total of 1,813 LCP participants were included. The median number of sessions attended was 10 of 21-25 sessions. Highest LCP engagement was associated with factors potentially related to self-efficacy/motivation, such as older age, higher baseline weight, prior healthcare utilization and an absence of a history of smoking or depression. Engagement was also negatively associated with being Non-Hispanic Black versus White. The qualitative analysis of the interviews revealed four general themes pertaining to participants' withdrawal: competing priorities, perceived program effectiveness, characteristics of the program, and facilitator-related factors. Taken together, results from this mixed-methods study suggest that motivation and self-efficacy are important for program engagement; future LCP enhancements should incorporate flexible formats that may help participants manage competing priorities and maximize personal and cultural relevance for all racial/ethnic groups, especially those who have not benefitted fully. Furthermore, participants should be encouraged to set realistic goals to manage expectations.

Engaging in a structured lifestyle change program (LCP) is essential to learn healthy behaviors, however, it is not well understood. This study examined factors associated with program engagement and reasons for program withdrawal at a large healthcare system. Highest LCP engagement was found to be associated to factors potentially related to self-efficacy/motivation including older age, higher initial weight, and prior healthcare utilization. Non-Hispanic Black, history of smoking, and prior diagnosis of depression were found to be negatively associated with LCP engagement. Program withdrawal was related to four themes: competing priorities, perceived program effectiveness, characteristics of the program, and facilitator-related factors. These findings suggest that motivation and self-efficacy are important for behavior change program engagement.

Implementing universal suicide screening in a large healthcare system's hospitals: rates of screening, suicide risk, and documentation of subsequent psychiatric care.

Implementation of suicide risk screening may improve prevention and facilitate mental health treatment. This study analyzed implementation of universal general population screening using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) within hospitals. The study included adults seen at 23 hospitals from 7/1/2019-12/31/2020. We describe rates of screening, suicide risk, and documented subsequent psychiatric care (i.e., transfer/discharge to psychiatric acute care, or referral/consultation with system-affiliated behavioral health providers). Patients with suicide risk (including those with Major Depressive Disorder [MDD]) were compared to those without using Wilcoxon rank-sum -tests for continuous variables and χ2 tests for categorical variables. Results reported are statistically significant at p < 0.05 level. Among 595,915 patients, 84.5% were screened by C-SSRS with 2.2% of them screening positive (37.6% low risk [i.e., ideation only], and 62.4% moderate or high risk [i.e., with a plan, intent, or suicidal behaviors]). Of individuals with suicide risk, 52.5% had documentation of psychiatric care within 90 days. Individuals with suicide risk (vs. without) were male (48.1% vs 43.0%), Non-Hispanic White (55.0% vs 47.8%), younger (mean age 41.0 [SD: 17.7] vs. 49.8 [SD: 20.4]), housing insecure (12.5% vs 2.6%), with mental health diagnoses (80.3% vs 25.1%), including MDD (41.3% vs 6.7%). Universal screening identified 2.2% of screened adults with suicide risk; 62.4% expressed a plan, intent or suicidal behaviors, and 80.3% had mental health diagnoses. Documented subsequent psychiatric care likely underestimates true rates due to care fragmentation. These findings reinforce the need for screening, and research on whether screening leads to improved care and fewer suicides.

This study reported outcomes of standardized suicide screening using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale among adults in 23 hospitals in a large health system in northern California between 7/1/2019 and 12/31/2020. Out of 595,915 patients seen in hospital inpatient or emergency departments, 84.5% were screened and among them 2.2% had suicide risk, 41.3% of whom had a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder. Compared to patients without suicide risk, a higher proportion of patients who screened positive for suicide risk were male, Non-Hispanic White, younger, recently homeless, and had co-occurring mental health diagnoses. Overall, 52.5% of those screening positive for suicide risk had documentation of subsequent psychiatric care within the health system within 90 days and this rate was even higher (73%) for individuals whose screenings indicated the highest risk. These findings reinforce the need for increased screening, and research to determine whether screening leads to improved care and fewer suicides.

Improvement in Blood Pressure Control in Safety Net Clinics Receiving 2 Versions of a Scalable Quality Improvement Intervention: BP MAP A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Trial.

Background Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) remains a leading cause of death in the United States. The American Medical Association developed a quality improvement program to improve BP control, but it is unclear how to efficiently implement this program at scale across multiple health systems. Methods and Results We conducted BP MAP (Blood Pressure Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner With Patients), a comparative effectiveness trial with clinic-level randomization to compare 2 scalable versions of the quality improvement program: Full Support (with support from quality improvement expert) and Self-Guided (using only online materials). Outcomes were clinic-level BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) and other BP-related process metrics calculated using electronic health record data. Difference-in-differences were used to compare changes in outcomes from baseline to 6 months, between intervention arms, and to a nonrandomized Usual Care arm composed of 18 health systems. A total of 24 safety-net clinics in 9 different health systems underwent randomization and then simultaneous implementation. BP control increased from 56.7% to 59.1% in the Full Support arm, and 62.0% to 63.1% in the Self-Guided arm, whereas BP control dropped slightly from 61.3% to 60.9% in the Usual Care arm. The between-group differences-in-differences were not statistically significant (Full Support versus Self-Guided=+1.2% [95% CI, -3.2% to 5.6%], P=0.59; Full Support versus Usual Care=+3.2% [-0.5% to 6.9%], P=0.09; Self-Guided versus Usual Care=+2.0% [-0.4% to 4.5%], P=0.10). Conclusions In this randomized trial, 2 methods of implementing a quality improvement intervention in 24 safety net clinics led to modest improvements in BP control that were not statistically significant. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03818659.

Racial Disparities in Pulse Oximeter Device Inaccuracy and Estimated Clinical Impact on COVID-19 Treatment Course.

Arterial blood oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2)) may be differentially less accurate for people with darker skin pigmentation, which could potentially affect the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment. We analyzed pulse oximeter accuracy and its association with COVID-19 treatment outcomes using electronic health record data from Sutter Health, a large, mixed-payer, integrated health-care delivery system in Northern California. We analyzed 2 cohorts: 1) 43,753 non-Hispanic White (NHW) or non-Hispanic Black/African-American (NHB) adults with concurrent arterial blood gas oxygen saturation/SpO2 measurements taken between January 2020 and February 2021; and 2) 8,735 adults who went to a hospital emergency department with COVID-19 between July 2020 and February 2021. Pulse oximetry systematically overestimated blood oxygenation by 1% more in NHB individuals than in NHW individuals. For people with COVID-19, this was associated with lower admission probability (-3.1 percentage points), dexamethasone treatment (-3.1 percentage points), and supplemental oxygen treatment (-4.5 percentage points), as well as increased time to treatment: 37.2 minutes before dexamethasone initiation and 278.5 minutes before initiation of supplemental oxygen. These results call for additional investigation of pulse oximeters and suggest that current guidelines for development, testing, and calibration of these devices should be revisited, investigated, and revised.

The U.S. COVID-19 County Policy Database: a novel resource to support pandemic-related research.

BACKGROUND: It is increasingly recognized that policies have played a role in both alleviating and exacerbating the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has been limited systematic evaluation of variation in U.S. local COVID-19-related policies. This study introduces the U.S. COVID-19 County Policy (UCCP) Database, whose objective is to systematically gather, characterize, and assess variation in U.S. county-level COVID-19-related policies. METHODS: In January-March 2021, we collected an initial wave of cross-sectional data from government and media websites for 171 counties in 7 states on 22 county-level COVID-19-related policies within 3 policy domains that are likely to affect health: (1) containment/closure, (2) economic support, and (3) public health. We characterized the presence and comprehensiveness of policies using univariate analyses. We also examined the correlation of policies with one another using bivariate Spearman's correlations. Finally, we examined geographical variation in policies across and within states. RESULTS: There was substantial variation in the presence and comprehensiveness of county policies during January-March 2021. For containment and closure policies, the percent of counties with no restrictions ranged from 0% (for public events) to more than half for public transportation (67.8%), hair salons (52.6%), and religious gatherings (52.0%). For economic policies, 76.6% of counties had housing support, while 64.9% had utility relief. For public health policies, most were comprehensive, with 70.8% of counties having coordinated public information campaigns, and 66.7% requiring masks outside the home at all times. Correlations between containment and closure policies tended to be positive and moderate (i.e., coefficients 0.4-0.59). There was variation within and across states in the number and comprehensiveness of policies. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduces the UCCP Database, presenting granular data on local governments' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We documented substantial variation within and across states on a wide range of policies at a single point in time. By making these data publicly available, this study supports future research that can leverage this database to examine how policies contributed to and continue to influence pandemic-related health and socioeconomic outcomes and disparities. The UCCP database is available online and will include additional time points for 2020-2021 and additional counties nationwide.

HOMBRE: A Trial Comparing 2 Weight Loss Approaches for Latino Men.

INTRODUCTION: Latino men have been drastically under-represented in research to identify effective behavioral weight-loss interventions. This trial compared 2 interventions for weight loss: (1) a culturally adapted intervention (HOMBRE) and (2) a minimal-intensity intervention. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Latino men with a BMI ≥27 kg/m2 and 1 or more cardiometabolic risk factors (N=424) were recruited (February 15, 2017‒October 2, 2018) from 14 medical centers and randomized to receive 1 of the 2 interventions. INTERVENTION: HOMBRE provided men a choice among 3 options: coach-facilitated group sessions using online video conferencing, coach-facilitated group sessions in person, and prerecorded videos of group sessions available online. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants sustaining clinically significant (≥5% of baseline) weight loss at 18 months. Secondary outcomes included weight loss trajectory over time, 3% and 10% weight loss, cardiometabolic risk factors, health behaviors, and psychosocial well-being at baseline and 18 months. Data were analyzed from October 6, 2020 to January 15, 2022. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly middle aged (47.0 [SD=11.9] years), were married (74.3%), were with at least some college experience (79.7%), and had middle to upper incomes (72.4% with annual family incomes >$75,000). Their average BMI was 33.1 kg/m2 (SD=5.1). The proportion achieving clinically significant weight loss at 18 months was 27.4% in the HOMBRE intervention and 20.6% in the minimal-intensity intervention (mean difference=7.2%, 95% CI= -1.8, 17.0; p=0.13). Mean difference between the HOMBRE vs the minimal-intensity group was ‒1.25 kg at 6 months (95% CI= -2.28, -0.21; p=0.02) and ‒1.11 kg at 12 months (95% CI= -2.11, -0.10; p=0.03) using weight measurement data abstracted from the Electronic Health Record and by self report. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among Latino men with overweight and obesity, HOMBRE was not more effective for clinically significant weight loss than a minimal-intensity intervention at 18 months.

Preferences for Technology-Mediated Behavioral Lifestyle Interventions With Different Levels of Coach and Peer Support Among Latino Men: Comparative Study Within One Arm of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although Latino men have the highest prevalence (45%) of obesity among all men in the United States, traditional weight loss interventions have not effectively engaged this hard-to-reach and diverse group. Offering choices among technology-mediated weight loss interventions may offer advantages. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine Latino men's preferences among 3 weight loss intervention options. We also examined whether attendance in group sessions (videoconference and in person) and weight loss differed according to intervention choice. METHODS: Latino men (n=200; mean age 47.3, SD 11.8 years) participated in a comparative effectiveness trial based on primary care and were randomized to receive the 1-year HOMBRE (Hombres con Opciones para Mejorar su Bienestar para Reducir Enfermedades Crónicas; English translation: Men With Options to Improve Their Well-being and Reduce Chronic Disease) intervention. HOMBRE is a weight loss intervention that offers 3 delivery options. During an orientation session, a trained bilingual coach helped men select 1 of the 3 intervention options that differed in coach, peer support, and available language. We used canonical discriminant analysis to assess multivariate associations of demographic, clinical, employment, cultural, and technology use and access factors with men's intervention choices. We used generalized linear models to estimate weight loss at 6, 12, and 18 months for men in each intervention option. RESULTS: Among Latino men, 28% (56/200) chose videoconference groups, 31% (62/200) chose web-based videos, and 41% (82/200) chose in-person groups. The canonical discriminant analysis identified 1 orthogonal dimension that distinguished between men who chose an in-person group and men who chose web-based videos. Men who were older, spoke Spanish, and did not use a computer frequently had a higher probability of choosing in-person groups versus web-based videos. For men who selected a group delivery option, 86.9% (107/123) attended ≥25% of the sessions, 83.7% (103/123) attended ≥50% of the sessions, and 73.2% (90/123) attended ≥75% of the sessions, with no differences by type of group (videoconference or in person). Men who chose videoconference and in-person group sessions lost significantly more weight at 6 months (both P<.001) and 18 months (P=.02 and P=.04, respectively) than those who chose web-based videos. Men who chose in-person group sessions also lost significantly more weight at 12 months (P=.008) than those who chose web-based videos. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences according to demographic, employment, cultural, and technology use factors between men who chose 1 of the 3 intervention options. Men who chose one of the group-based options (videoconference or in person) lost significantly more weight than those who chose web-based videos. Providing options that accommodate the diversity of Latino men's preferences is important for increasing engagement in behavioral interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03092960; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03092960.

COVID-19 in pregnancy by race and ethnicity: Implications for development of a vaccination strategy.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 and associated morbidity and mortality has disproportionately affected minoritized populations. The epidemiology of spread of COVID-19 among pregnant women by race/ethnicity is not well described. Using data from a large healthcare system in California, we estimated prevalence and spread during pregnancy and recommend a vaccination approach based on minimizing adverse outcomes. METHODS: Patients delivering at Sutter Health are tested (molecular) for COVID-19. These results were combined with antibody test results, using samples drawn at delivery. For each racial/ethnic group, we estimated prevalence of COVID-19, using logistic regression to adjust for known sociodemographic and comorbid risk factors. Testing for immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M provided insight into timing of infections. RESULTS: Among 17,446 women delivering May-December, 460 (2.6%) tested positive (molecular). Hispanic women were at 2.6 times the odds of being actively infected as White women (odds ratio = 2.6, 95% confidence interval = 2.0-3.3). August and December were the highest risk periods for active infection (odds ratio = 3.5, 95% confidence interval = 2.1-5.7 and odds ratio = 6.1, 95% confidence interval = 3.8-9.9, compared with May, respectively). Among 4500 women delivering October-December, 425 (9.4%) had positive molecular or antibody tests, ranging from 4.0% (Asian) to 15.7% (Hispanic). Adjusting for covariables, compared with White patients, odds of infection was similar for Black and Asian patients, with Hispanic at 2.4 (1.8-3.3) times the odds. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 prevalence was higher among Hispanic women at delivery and in the last trimester than their White counterparts. Higher rates in Black patients are explained by other risk factors. Resources should be directed to increase vaccination rates among Hispanic women in early stages of pregnancy.

Evaluation of a social determinants of health screening questionnaire and workflow pilot within an adult ambulatory clinic.

BACKGROUND: There is increased recognition in clinical settings of the importance of documenting, understanding, and addressing patients' social determinants of health (SDOH) to improve health and address health inequities. This study evaluated a pilot of a standardized SDOH screening questionnaire and workflow in an ambulatory clinic within a large integrated health network in Northern California. METHODS: The pilot screened for SDOH needs using an 11-question Epic-compatible paper questionnaire assessing eight SDOH and health behavior domains: financial resource, transportation, stress, depression, intimate partner violence, social connections, physical activity, and alcohol consumption. Eligible patients for the pilot receiving a Medicare wellness, adult annual, or new patient visits during a five-week period (February-March, 2020), and a comparison group from the same time period in 2019 were identified. Sociodemographic data (age, sex, race/ethnicity, and payment type), visit type, length of visit, and responses to SDOH questions were extracted from electronic health records, and a staff experience survey was administered. The evaluation was guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. RESULTS: Two-hundred eighty-nine patients were eligible for SDOH screening. Responsiveness by domain ranged from 55 to 67%, except for depression. Half of patients had at least one identified social need, the most common being stress (33%), physical activity (22%), alcohol (12%), and social connections (6%). Physical activity needs were identified more in females (81% vs. 19% in males, p < .01) and at new patient/transfer visits (48% vs. 13% at Medicare wellness and 38% at adult wellness visits, p < .05). Average length of visit was 39.8 min, which was 1.7 min longer than that in 2019. Visit lengths were longer among patients 65+ (43.4 min) and patients having public insurance (43.6 min). Most staff agreed that collecting SDOH data was relevant and accepted the SDOH questionnaire and workflow but highlighted opportunities for improvement in training and connecting patients to resources. CONCLUSION: Use of evidence-based SDOH screening questions and associated workflow was effective in gathering patient SDOH information and identifying social needs in an ambulatory setting. Future studies should use qualitative data to understand patient and staff experiences with collecting SDOH information in healthcare settings.

Tracking Blood Pressure Control Performance and Process Metrics in 25 US Health Systems: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory.

Background The National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System was established to identify opportunities for blood pressure (BP) control improvement and to provide a mechanism for tracking improvement longitudinally. Methods and Results We conducted a serial cross-sectional study with queries against standardized electronic health record data in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) common data model returned by 25 participating US health systems. Queries produced BP control metrics for adults with well-documented hypertension and a recent encounter at the health system for a series of 1-year measurement periods for each quarter of available data from January 2017 to March 2020. Aggregate weighted results are presented overall and by race and ethnicity. The most recent measurement period includes data from 1 737 995 patients, and 11 956 509 patient-years were included in the trend analysis. Overall, 15% were Black, 52% women, and 28% had diabetes. BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) was observed in 62% (range, 44%-74%) but varied by race and ethnicity, with the lowest BP control among Black patients at 57% (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.94). A new class of antihypertensive medication (medication intensification) was prescribed in just 12% (range, 0.6%-25%) of patient visits where BP was uncontrolled. However, when medication intensification occurred, there was a large decrease in systolic BP (≈15 mm Hg; range, 5-18 mm Hg). Conclusions Major opportunities exist for improving BP control and reducing disparities, especially through consistent medication intensification when BP is uncontrolled. These data demonstrate substantial room for improvement and opportunities to close health equity gaps.

The Evolving Role of Nurse Leadership in the Fight for Health Equity.

Devastating disparities in COVID-19 infection and outcomes among socioeconomically marginalized groups have resulted in a public outcry to address longstanding societal inequities that have contributed to the present situation. Nurse leaders have an opportunity and an obligation in this moment to lend their skills as scientists, innovators, advocates, and educators to lead in these efforts, advancing health equity for all.