Urinary Incontinence in Primary Care-The Gap Between Recommendations and Real World.

IMPORTANCE: Routine screening for urinary incontinence (UI) by primary care providers (PCPs) is recommended. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe the rate of incident UI diagnosed at annual PCP visits, the prevalence of UI in a large primary care population, and estimate the rate of screening for UI during primary care preventive and annual wellness visits. Secondary aims were to describe PCP knowledge and behavior as they relate to UI screening and diagnosis. STUDY DESIGN: The electronic health record was used to abstract the number of adult female patients seen by PCPs within a regional health system with a diagnosis of UI before our study period and with a new diagnosis over a 2-year period. Additional new diagnoses and screening practices were found on chart review of an additional 824 representative charts. Primary care providers within the health system were surveyed about their screening practices and knowledge about UI. RESULTS: There were 192,053 women primary care patients seen over 2 years. A total of 5.7% had a UI diagnosis preceding the study period and 3.4% had a UI diagnosis during the study period. A total of 42% of PCPs reported that they screen for UI at least half the time and none were completely satisfied with their ability to screen for UI. Sixteen percent of annual wellness visits had any documentation of screening for UI. CONCLUSION: In a large primary care population, screening for and detection of UI in women was low.

Health information technology tools to accelerate gastrointestinal evaluation in patients with iron deficiency anaemia: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: System-level safety measures do not exist to ensure that patients with iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) undergo proper diagnostic evaluations. We sought to determine if a set of EHR (electronic health record) tools and an expedited referral workflow increase short-term completion of bidirectional endoscopy in higher risk patients with IDA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomised trial randomised by primary care physician (PCP) that included 16 PCPs and 316 patients with IDA. Physicians were randomised to intervention or control groups. Intervention components included a patient registry visible within the EHR, point-of-care alert and expedited diagnostic evaluation workflow for IDA. Outcomes were assessed at 120 days. The primary outcome was completion of bidirectional endoscopy. Secondary outcomes were any endoscopy completed or scheduled, gastroenterology consultation completed, and gastroenterology referral or endoscopy ordered or completed. RESULTS: There were no differences in the primary or secondary outcomes. At 120 days, the primary outcome had occurred for 7 (4%) of the intervention group and 5 (3.5%) of the control group. For the three secondary outcomes, rates were 15 (8.6%), 12 (6.9%) and 39 (22.4%) for the immediate intervention group and 10 (7.0%), 9 (6.3%) and 25 (17.6%) for the control group, respectively, p>0.2. Lack of physician time to use the registry tools was identified as a barrier. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Providing PCPs with lists of patients with IDA and a pathway for expedited evaluation did not increase rates of completing endoscopic evaluation in the short term. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05365308.

Efficacy and safety of a four-drug, quarter-dose treatment for hypertension: the QUARTET USA randomized trial.

New approaches are needed to lower blood pressure (BP) given persistently low control rates. QUARTET USA sought to evaluate the effect of four-drug, quarter-dose BP lowering combination in patients with hypertension. QUARTET USA was a randomized (1:1), double-blinded trial conducted in federally qualified health centers among adults with hypertension. Participants received either a quadpill of candesartan 2 mg, amlodipine 1.25 mg, indapamide 0.625 mg, and bisoprolol 2.5 mg or candesartan 8 mg for 12 weeks. If BP was >130/>80 mm Hg at 6 weeks in either arm, then participants received open label add-on amlodipine 5 mg. The primary outcome was mean change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 12 weeks, controlling for baseline BP. Secondary outcomes included mean change in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and safety included serious adverse events, relevant adverse drug effects, and electrolyte abnormalities. Among 62 participants randomized between August 2019-May 2022 (n = 32 intervention, n = 30 control), mean (SD) age was 52 (11.5) years, 45% were female, 73% identified as Hispanic, and 18% identified as Black. Baseline mean (SD) SBP was 138.1 (11.2) mmHg, and baseline mean (SD) DBP was 84.3 (10.5) mmHg. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in SBP (-4.8 mm Hg [95% CI: -10.8, 1.3, p = 0.123] and a -4.9 mmHg (95% CI: -8.6, -1.3, p = 0.009) greater mean DBP change in the intervention arm compared with the control arm at 12 weeks. Adverse events did not differ significantly between arms. The quadpill had a similar SBP and greater DBP lowering effect compared with candesartan 8 mg. Trial registration number: NCT03640312.

Peer Comparison or Guideline-Based Feedback and Postsurgery Opioid Prescriptions: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Excess opioid prescribing after surgery can result in prolonged use and diversion. Email feedback based on social norms may reduce the number of pills prescribed. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of 2 social norm-based interventions on reducing guideline-discordant opioid prescribing after surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at a large health care delivery system in northern California between October 2021 and October 2022 included general, obstetric/gynecologic, and orthopedic surgeons with patients aged 18 years or older discharged to home with an oral opioid prescription. Interventions: In 19 hospitals, 3 surgical specialties (general, orthopedic, and obstetric/gynecologic) were randomly assigned to a control group or 1 of 2 interventions. The guidelines intervention provided email feedback to surgeons on opioid prescribing relative to institutionally endorsed guidelines; the peer comparison intervention provided email feedback on opioid prescribing relative to that of peer surgeons. Emails were sent to surgeons with at least 2 guideline-discordant prescriptions in the previous month. The control group had no intervention. Main Outcome and Measures: The probability that a discharged patient was prescribed a quantity of opioids above the guideline for the respective procedure during the 12 intervention months. Results: There were 38 235 patients discharged from 640 surgeons during the 12-month intervention period. Control-group surgeons prescribed above guidelines 36.8% of the time during the intervention period compared with 27.5% and 25.4% among surgeons in the peer comparison and guidelines arms, respectively. In adjusted models, the peer comparison intervention reduced guideline-discordant prescribing by 5.8 percentage points (95% CI, -10.5 to -1.1; P = .03) and the guidelines intervention reduced it by 4.7 percentage points (95% CI, -9.4 to -0.1; P = .05). Effects were driven by surgeons who performed more surgeries and had more guideline-discordant prescribing at baseline. There was no significant difference between interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial, email feedback based on either guidelines or peer comparison reduced opioid prescribing after surgery. Guideline-based feedback was as effective as peer comparison-based feedback. These interventions are simple, low-cost, and scalable, and may reduce downstream opioid misuse. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05070338.

Blood pressure outcomes at 18 months in primary care patients prescribed remote physiological monitoring for hypertension: a prospective cohort study.

This pragmatic matched cohort study using EHR data extended the follow up to 18 months for BP outcomes comparing individuals prescribed remote patient monitoring (n = 288) and temporally-matched controls (n = 1152) from six primary care practices. After 18 months, the RPM-prescribed cohort had greater BP control < 140/90 mm Hg (RPM cohort: 71.5%, control cohort: 51.9%, p < 0.001) and lower systolic BP (131.6 versus 136.0 mm Hg, p = 0.004) using office and home measurements. BP control at 18 months assessed by office measurements only was also higher in the RPM group (62.2% versus 51.9%, p = 0.004).

Use of Telehealth Information for Early Detection: Insights From the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objectives. To examine whether the addition of telehealth data to existing surveillance infrastructure can improve forecasts of cases and mortality. Methods. In this observational study, we compared accuracy of 14-day forecasts using real-time data available to the National Syndromic Surveillance Program (standard forecasts) to forecasts that also included telehealth information (telehealth forecasts). The study was performed in a national telehealth service provider in 2020 serving 50 US states and the District of Columbia. Results. Among 10.5 million telemedicine encounters, 169 672 probable COVID-19 cases were diagnosed by 5050 clinicians, with a rate between 0.79 and 47.8 probable cases per 100 000 encounters per day (mean = 8.37; SD = 10.75). Publicly reported case counts ranged from 0.5 to 237 916 (mean: 53 913; SD = 47 466) and 0 to 2328 deaths (mean = 1035; SD = 550) per day. Telehealth-based forecasts improved 14-day case forecasting accuracy by 1.8 percentage points to 30.9% (P = .06) and mortality forecasting by 6.4 percentage points to 26.9% (P < .048). Conclusions. Modest improvements in forecasting can be gained from adding telehealth data to syndromic surveillance infrastructure. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(2):218-225. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307499).

Reducing Care Overuse in Older Patients Using Professional Norms and Accountability : A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective strategies are needed to curtail overuse that may lead to harm. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of clinician decision support redirecting attention to harms and engaging social and reputational concerns on overuse in older primary care patients. DESIGN: 18-month, single-blind, pragmatic, cluster randomized trial, constrained randomization. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04289753). SETTING: 60 primary care internal medicine, family medicine and geriatrics practices within a health system from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 371 primary care clinicians and their older adult patients from participating practices. INTERVENTION: Behavioral science-informed, point-of-care, clinical decision support tools plus brief case-based education addressing the 3 primary clinical outcomes (187 clinicians from 30 clinics) were compared with brief case-based education alone (187 clinicians from 30 clinics). Decision support was designed to increase salience of potential harms, convey social norms, and promote accountability. MEASUREMENTS: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in men aged 76 years and older without previous prostate cancer, urine testing for nonspecific reasons in women aged 65 years and older, and overtreatment of diabetes with hypoglycemic agents in patients aged 75 years and older and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) less than 7%. RESULTS: At randomization, mean clinic annual PSA testing, unspecified urine testing, and diabetes overtreatment rates were 24.9, 23.9, and 16.8 per 100 patients, respectively. After 18 months of intervention, the intervention group had lower adjusted difference-in-differences in annual rates of PSA testing (-8.7 [95% CI, -10.2 to -7.1]), unspecified urine testing (-5.5 [CI, -7.0 to -3.6]), and diabetes overtreatment (-1.4 [CI, -2.9 to -0.03]) compared with education only. Safety measures did not show increased emergency care related to urinary tract infections or hyperglycemia. An HbA1c greater than 9.0% was more common with the intervention among previously overtreated diabetes patients (adjusted difference-in-differences, 0.47 per 100 patients [95% CI, 0.04 to 1.20]). LIMITATION: A single health system limits generalizability; electronic health data limit ability to differentiate between overtesting and underdocumentation. CONCLUSION: Decision support designed to increase clinicians' attention to possible harms, social norms, and reputational concerns reduced unspecified testing compared with offering traditional case-based education alone. Small decreases in diabetes overtreatment may also result in higher rates of uncontrolled diabetes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: Patterns in a nationwide telehealth service provider.

We examined 3,046,538 acute respiratory infection (ARI) encounters with 6,103 national telehealth physicians from January 2019 to October 2021. The antibiotic prescribing rates were 44% for all ARIs; 46% were antibiotic appropriate; 65% were potentially appropriate; 19% resulted from inappropriate diagnoses; and 10% were related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis.

Blood pressure outcomes at 12 months in primary care patients prescribed remote physiological monitoring for hypertension: a prospective cohort study.

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) for hypertension enables automatic transmission of blood pressure (BP) and pulse into the electronic health record (EHR), but its effectiveness in primary care is unknown. This pragmatic matched cohort study using EHR data compared BP outcomes between individuals prescribed RPM and temporally-matched controls from six primary care practices. We retrospectively created a cohort of 288 Medicare-enrolled patients prescribed BP RPM (cases) and 1152 propensity score-matched controls (1:4). Matching was based on age, sex, systolic blood pressure (SBP), marital status, and other characteristics. Outcomes at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months were: controlling high BP (most recent BP < 140/90 mm Hg), antihypertensive medication intensification, and most recent SBP assessed using: all measurements, and office measurements only. At baseline, RPM-prescribed patients and controls had similar ages and systolic BP. BP control diverged at 3 months (RPM: 72.2%, control: 51%, p < 0.001). This difference persisted but decreased over follow-up. After 12 months, the RPM-prescribed cohort had greater BP control (RPM: 71.5%, control: 58.1%, p < 0.001) and lower SBP (132.3 versus 136.5 mm Hg, p = 0.003) using all measurements, but they did not differ using only office measurements (12 month BP control: 60.8% versus 58.1%, p = 0.44; SBP: 135.9 versus 136.5 mm Hg, p = 0.91). At 12 months, the most recent BP measurements were more current for RPM-prescribed patients (median [IQR] 8 [0-109] versus 134 [56-239] days). Net increases in antihypertensive medications by 12 months were similar. Implementation of RPM in primary care could inform hypertension management strategies and increase hypertension control. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05562921.

Clinician Job Satisfaction After Peer Comparison Feedback: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Interventions that improve clinician performance through feedback should not contribute to job dissatisfaction or staff turnover. Measurement of job satisfaction may help identify interventions that lead to this undesirable consequence. Objective: To evaluate whether mean job satisfaction was less than the margin of clinical significance among clinicians who received social norm feedback (peer comparison) compared with clinicians who did not. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary, preregistered, noninferiority analysis of a cluster randomized trial compared 3 interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design from November 1, 2011, to April 1, 2014. A total of 248 clinicians were enrolled from 47 clinics. The sample size for this analysis was determined by the number of nonmissing job satisfaction scores from the original enrolled sample, which was 201 clinicians from 43 clinics. Data analysis was performed from October 12 to April 13, 2022. Interventions: Feedback comparing individual clinician performance to top-performing peers, delivered in monthly emails (peer comparison). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a response to the following statement: "Overall, I am satisfied with my current job." Responses ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Results: A total of 201 clinicians (response rate, 81%) from 43 of the 47 clinics (91%) provided a survey response about job satisfaction. Clinicians were primarily female (n = 129 [64%]) and board certified in internal medicine (n = 126 [63%]), with a mean (SD) age of 48 (10) years. The clinic-clustered difference in mean job satisfaction was greater than -0.32 (ß = 0.11; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.42; P = .46). Therefore, the preregistered null hypothesis that peer comparison is inferior by resulting in at least a 1-point decrease in job satisfaction by 1 in 3 clinicians was rejected. The secondary null hypothesis that job satisfaction was similar among clinicians randomized to social norm feedback was not able to be rejected. The effect size did not change when controlling for other trial interventions (t = 0.08; P = .94), and no interaction effects were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, peer comparison did not lead to lower job satisfaction. Features that may have protected against dissatisfaction include clinicians' agency over the performance measure, privacy of individual performance, and allowing all clinicians to achieve top performance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT05575115 and NCT01454947.

Prospective Cohort Study of Remote Patient Monitoring with and without Care Coordination for Hypertension in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-office blood pressure (BP) measurements contribute valuable information for guiding clinical management of hypertension. Measurements from home devices can be directly transmitted to patients' electronic health record for use in remote monitoring programs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare in primary care practice care coordinator-assisted implementation of remote patient monitoring (RPM) for hypertension to RPM implementation alone and to usual care. METHODS: This was a pragmatic observational cohort study. Patients aged 65 to 85 years with Medicare insurance from two populations were included: those with uncontrolled hypertension and a general hypertension group seeing primary care physicians (PCPs) within one health system. Exposures were clinic-level availability of RPM plus care coordination, RPM alone, or usual care. At two clinics (13 PCPs), nurse care coordinators with PCP approval offered RPM to patients with uncontrolled office BP and assisted with initiation. At two clinics (39 PCPs), RPM was at PCPs' discretion. Twenty clinics continued usual care. Main measures were controlling high BP (<140/90 mm Hg), last office systolic blood pressure (SBP), and proportion with antihypertensive medication intensification. RESULTS: Among the Medicare cohorts with uncontrolled hypertension, 16.7% (39/234) of patients from the care coordination clinics were prescribed RPM versus <1% (4/600) at noncare coordination sites. RPM-enrolled care coordination group patients had higher baseline SBP than the noncare coordination group (148.8 vs. 140.0 mm Hg). After 6 months, in the uncontrolled hypertension cohorts the prevalences of controlling high BP were 32.5% (RPM with care coordination), 30.7 % (RPM alone), and 27.1% (usual care); multivariable adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) were 1.63 (1.12-2.39; p = 0.011) and 1.29 (0.98-1.69; p = 0.068) compared with usual care, respectively. CONCLUSION: Care coordination facilitated RPM enrollment among poorly controlled hypertension patients and may improve hypertension control in primary care among Medicare patients.

Is more better? The impact of implementing more interventions for hypertension control in a practice facilitation study for small- and medium-sized practices.

Interventions for blood pressure (BP) control have positive effects on outcomes for patients with hypertension. Research on these effects in small- and medium-sized practices is limited. Our retrospective analysis used data from Healthy Hearts in the Heartland (H3), a research program conducted in 2016-2018 as part of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's EvidenceNOW initiative, to examine the impact of implementing more interventions for BP control in these settings. Thirty-eight H3 practices met inclusion criteria and were assigned to an implementer group (high or low) based on the number of interventions implemented with the support of a practice facilitator during the study. Practices in the high-implementer group implemented a mean of 2.2 additional interventions relative to the low-implementer group. Groups were compared on two measures of BP control: (1) mean percentage of hypertensive patients with a most recent BP below 140/90, and (2) mean systolic and diastolic BP of hypertensive patients. In the first measure, practices in the high-implementer group had greater improvement between baseline and the end of the study. Among the 10,150 patients included in the second measure, reductions in mean SBP and DBP were greater for the high-implementer group. These outcomes show that implementing additional interventions had a positive association with measures of BP control, though clinical significance was unknown or limited. Future research is needed to understand the impact of interventions for BP control in small- and medium-sized practices, including the interactions among intervention implementation, practice facilitation, and practice and patient characteristics.

A Curated Curriculum Collection to Support Social Determinants of Health Education for the Health Professions.

The importance of preparing students and practitioners in the health professions to understand and be equipped to address the social determinants of health (SDOH) has become increasingly urgent. To help support this goal, faculty and staff from the National Collaborative for Education to Address the Social Determinants of Health built a digital platform for health professions educators to access and share curricular work related to SDOH. As of 2022, this online resource included more than 200 curricula focused on SDOH and additional content related to both SDOH and health equity. Educators in undergraduate and graduate medicine, nursing, pharmacy, continuing education, and other fields may find these resources relevant to their teaching practice and consider this platform as a way to disseminate their work in this field to others.

Examining How Social Risk Factors Are Integrated Into Clinical Settings Using Existing Data: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Integrating social care into clinical care requires substantial resources. Use of existing data through a geographic information system (GIS) has the potential to support efficient and effective integration of social care into clinical settings. We conducted a scoping literature review characterizing its use in primary care settings to identify and address social risk factors. METHODS: In December 2018, we searched 2 databases and extracted structured data for eligible articles that (1) described the use of GIS in clinical settings to identify and/or intervene on social risks, (2) were published between December 2013 and December 2018, and (3) were based in the United States. Additional studies were identified by examining references. RESULTS: Of the 5,574 articles included for review, 18 met study eligibility criteria: 14 (78%) were descriptive studies, 3 (17%) tested an intervention, and 1 (6%) was a theoretical report. All studies used GIS to identify social risks (increase awareness); 3 studies (17%) described interventions to address social risks, primarily by identifying relevant community resources and aligning clinical services to patients' needs. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies describe associations between GIS and population health outcomes; however, there is a paucity of literature regarding GIS use to identify and address social risk factors in clinical settings. GIS technology may assist health systems seeking to address population health outcomes through alignment and advocacy; its current application in clinical care delivery is infrequent and largely limited to referring patients to local community resources.

The Current State of Antiracism Curricula in Undergraduate and Graduate Medical Education: A Qualitative Study of US Academic Health Centers.

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to evaluate the current state of pedagogy on antiracism, including barriers to implementation and strengths of existing curricula, in undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME) programs in US academic health centers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with an exploratory qualitative approach using semistructured interviews. Participants were leaders of UME and GME programs at 5 institutions participating in the Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement program and 6 affiliated sites from November 2021 to April 2022. RESULTS: A total of 29 program leaders from the 11 academic health centers participated in this study. Three participants from 2 institutions reported the implementation of robust, intentional, and longitudinal antiracism curricula. Nine participants from 7 institutions described race and antiracism-related topics integrated into health equity curricula. Only 9 participants reported having "adequately trained" faculty. Participants mentioned individual, systemic, and structural barriers to implementing antiracism-related training in medical education such as institutional inertia and insufficient resources. Fear related to introducing an antiracism curriculum and undervaluing of this curriculum relative to other content were identified. Through learners and faculty feedback, antiracism content was evaluated and included in UME and GME curricula. Most participants identified learners as a stronger voice for transformation than faculty; antiracism content was mainly included in health equity curricula. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of antiracism in medical education requires intentional training, focused institutional policies, enhanced foundational awareness of the impact of racism on patients and communities, and changes at the level of institutions and accreditation bodies.

Remote physiologic monitoring for hypertension in primary care: a prospective pragmatic pilot study in electronic health records using propensity score matching.

Objectives: Since 2019, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services covers remote physiologic monitoring (RPM) for blood pressure (BP) per hypertension diagnosis and treatment guidelines. Here, we integrated Omron VitalSight RPM into the health system's electronic health record to transmit BP and pulse without manual entry, assessed feasibility, and used pragmatic prospective matched cohort studies to assess initial effects in (1) uncontrolled (last two office BP ≥140/90 mmHg) and (2) general (diagnosed hypertension or last office BP ≥140/90 mmHg) hypertension patient populations. Materials and Methods: Seventeen clinicians at two internal medicine practices were oriented. Eligible patients were aged 65-85 years had Medicare insurance with ≥1 office visit in the previous year. We prospectively identified matched controls (age, sex, BP, and number of office visits in previous year) from other primary care practices within the health system and estimated the association between RPM availability (clinic-level) and patient BP outcomes after 6 months. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04604925. Results: Feasibility. Uptake was low at pilot clinics: 10 physicians prescribed RPM to 118 patients during the 6-month pilot. This included 7% (14/207) of the prespecified uncontrolled hypertension cohort and 3.3% (78/2356) of the general hypertension cohort. Surveyed clinicians (n = 4) reported changing their patients' medical treatment in response to RPM BPs, although they recommended having a dedicated RN or LPN to review BP readings. Effectiveness. At 6 months, BP control was greater at pilot practices than among matched controls (uncontrolled: 31.4% vs 22.8%; P = .007; general: 64.0% vs 59.7%; P < .001). Systolic BP at last office visit did not differ (mean [SD] 146.0 [15.7] vs 147.1 [15.6]; P = .48) in the uncontrolled population, and was lower in the general population (131.8 [15.7] vs 132.8 [15.9]; P = .04).The frequency of antihypertensive medication changes was similar in both groups (uncontrolled P = .986; general P = .218). Discussion and Conclusions: Uptake notwithstanding, RPM may have improved BP control. A potential mechanism is increased physician awareness of and attention to uncontrolled hypertension. Barriers to RPM use among physicians require further study.

Validation testing of five home blood pressure monitoring devices for the upper arm according to the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020 protocol.

The accuracy of Omron 10 Series BP7450 (HEM-7342T-Z), Omron Platinum BP5450 (HEM-7343T-Z), Walmart Equate Premium 8000 Series UA-8000WM, Walgreens Premium 15+ WGNBPA-960BT, and CVS Series 800 BP3MW1-4YCVS were assessed in an adult general population compared to a mercury sphygmomanometer standard according to the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020 validation procedure. Omron selected the monitors and included three non-Omron monitors because they were from large retail vendors in the United States and these monitors did not have accessible results from validation testing. The BP7450, N = 85, passed both criteria for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations between the test device and reference were 0.5 (7.7) and 2.5 (6.8) mm Hg. The BP5450, N = 86, passed both criteria. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 1.9 (7.0) and 3.6 (6.4) mm Hg. The UA-8000WM, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 2.5 (8.0) and 5.1 (6.4) mm Hg. The WGNBPA-240BT, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 7.9 (8.5) and 5.5 (6.7) mm Hg. The BP3MW1-4YCVS, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 5.8 (8.7) and 3.1 (5.6) mm Hg. These findings emphasize the importance of verifying the validation status of home blood pressure monitors before use by consumers.

Antibiotic stewardship to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in integrated academic health-system urgent care clinics.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and implement antibiotic stewardship activities in urgent care targeting non-antibiotic-appropriate acute respiratory tract infections (ARIs) that also reduces overall antibiotic prescribing and maintains patient satisfaction. PATIENTS AND SETTING: Patients and clinicians at the urgent care clinics of an integrated academic health system. INTERVENTION AND METHODS: The stewardship activities started in fiscal 2020 and included measure development, comparative feedback, and clinician and patient education. We measured antibiotic prescribing in fiscal years 2019, 2020, and 2021 for the stewardship targets, potential diagnosis-shifting visits, and overall. We also collected patient satisfaction data for ARI visits. RESULTS: From FY19 to FY21, 576,609 patients made 1,358,816 visits to 17 urgent care clinics, including 105,781 visits for which stewardship measures were applied and 149,691 visits for which diagnosis shifting measures were applied. The antibiotic prescribing rate decreased for stewardship-measure visits from 34% in FY19 to 12% in FY21 (absolute change, -22%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -23% to -22%). The antibiotic prescribing rate decreased for diagnosis-shifting visits from 63% to 35% (-28%; 95% CI, -28% to -27%), and the antibiotic prescribing rate decreased overall from 30% to 10% (-20%; 95% CI, -20% to -20%). The patient satisfaction rate increased from 83% in FY19 to 89% in FY20 and FY21. There was no significant association between antibiotic prescribing rates of individual clinicians and ARI visit patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Although it was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, an ambulatory antimicrobial stewardship program that focused on improving non-antibiotic-appropriate ARI prescribing was associated with decreased prescribing for (1) the stewardship target, (2) a diagnosis shifting measure, and (3) overall antibiotic prescribing. Patient satisfaction at ARI visits increased over time and was not associated with clinicians' antibiotic prescribing rates.