Identification of Hospitalized Patients Who May Benefit from a Serious Illness Conversation Using the Readmission Risk Score Combined with the Surprise Question.

BACKGROUND: Determining which patients benefit from a serious illness conversation (SIC) is challenging. The authors sought to determine whether Epic's Risk of Readmission Score (RRS), could be combined with a simple, validated, one-question mortality prognostic screen (the surprise question: Would you be surprised if the patient died in the next 12 months?) to identify hospitalized patients with SIC needs. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the authors randomly selected encounters for patients ≥ 18 years of age to a general medicine service from January 2019 to October 2021 who had an RRS > 28%. Two adjudicators independently performed chart reviews for each encounter to answer the surprise question to create two distinct prognostic groups (yes vs. no). Fisher's exact test was used to assess for statistically significant differences in standardized documentation of SICs between groups. RESULTS: Out of 2,879 encounters, 202 patient encounters were randomly selected. Adjudicators answered "no" to the surprise question for 156 (77.2%) patients. Patients for whom adjudicators answered "no" were generally older with higher comorbidity and more often had standardized documentation of a SIC (14 [9.0%] vs. 0.[0.0%], p = 0.042) compared to patients for whom adjudicators answered "yes." CONCLUSION: Approximately three quarters of patients with a high RRS were predicted to have a lifespan of less than a year. Although these patients were significantly more likely to have a SIC, rates of SICs were extremely low. Combining available electronic health record (EHR) data with a simple one-question screening tool may help identify hospitalized patients who require a SIC in quality improvement initiatives.

Supporting Underserved Communities for Health Care: US Immigrants' Experiences with Social Support.

Background: Social support is associated with improved clinical outcomes but is understudied among US immigrants. We examined two types of social support, perceived health provider support and community support, and characterized perceptions of social support among US immigrants compared with nonimmigrants. Methods: We conducted cross-sectional data analysis on self-reported data from Health Information National Trends Survey 5, Cycle 2. Population-level estimates were obtained using jack-knife replicate weights. Results: Immigrant status was not associated with perceived health care provider support or community support. However, compared with nonimmigrants, US immigrants were more likely to report rarely (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=3.07) or never (aOR=3.18) having access to emotional support. Conclusions: Further research that incorporates nuanced factors (eg, time since arrival) that may influence social support in diverse US immigrant groups is needed to determine the impact of social support on health outcomes in an underserved and often overlooked population.

Clinician Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators for Delivering Early Integrated Palliative Care via Telehealth.

Early integrated palliative care (EIPC) significantly improves clinical outcomes for patients with advanced cancer. Telehealth may be a useful tool to deliver EIPC sustainably and equitably. Palliative care clinicians completed a survey regarding their perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, and benefits of using telehealth video visits for delivering EIPC for patients with advanced lung cancer. Forty-eight clinicians across 22 cancer centers completed the survey between May and July 2022. Most (91.7%) agreed that telehealth increases access to EIPC and simplifies the process for patients to receive EIPC (79.2%). Clinicians noted that the elderly, those in rural areas, and those with less-resourced backgrounds have greater difficulty using telehealth. Perceived barriers were largely patient-based factors, including technological literacy, internet and device availability, and patient preferences. Clinicians agreed that several organizational factors facilitated telehealth EIPC delivery, including technological infrastructure (85.4%), training (83.3%), and support from study coordinators (81.3%). Other barriers included systems-based factors, such as insurance reimbursement and out-of-state coverage restrictions. Patient-, organization-, and systems-based factors are all important to providing and improving access to telehealth EIPC services. Further research is needed to investigate the efficacy of telehealth EIPC and how policies and interventions may improve access to and dissemination of this care modality.

Unmet Health and Social Welfare Needs of Women Who Inject Drugs in San Francisco.

We characterize social welfare and health care needs of women who inject drugs in a community-based survey in San Francisco. A total of 139 women were enrolled; 74.8% were homeless, and 67.6% earned below poverty level. Indicators of health care and prevention program access included: 95.7% with health insurance, 90.6% used a needle exchange program, and 58.2% tested for HIV two or more times. However, only 8.6% received HPV vaccination and there was unmet contraception need for 79.0% of women. Only 28.7% of those testing positive for HCV infection had received treatment. Physical and sexual violence in the last year were common (41.0% and 18.0%, respectively). Women who inject drugs would benefit from integrated health and social services including addressing interpersonal violence, sexual and reproductive health, and HIV and HCV prevention needs. Women-only needle exchange programs and safe injection sites may be effective delivery points for these services.