Dermatology Life Quality Index survey in patients with Down syndrome and caregivers.

Down syndrome (DS) is associated with many dermatological conditions, including hidradenitis suppurativa, folliculitis, and alopecia areata. Despite the high incidence of skin conditions in this population, there are no quality of life (QoL) studies in the dermatology literature focused on patients with DS or their caregivers. The frequently used QoL assessment tool, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), has yet to be studied in this population. This study addresses these disparities by capturing how various skin conditions affect the QoL of people with DS and their caregivers and assessing the utility of the DLQI.

Bias and Conflict of Interest in the Underreporting of Sexual Abuse in Competitive Sports: A Literature Review.

ABSTRACT: The prevalence of sexual abuse in competitive sports is increasing worldwide and requires a united call to action. The underreporting of such abuses gained media attention resulting from recent high-profile cases. In this article, we report the results of a systematic literature review, identifying root causes of underreporting sexual abuse in competitive sports. We identify that biases and conflicts of interest work against effective reporting of abuse by athletes at the individual, organizational, and cultural levels. We offer conflict of interest and bias mitigation approaches from the social science, law, business, research, and diagnostic error literature that may apply. Competitive sports organizations may use this analysis to identify barriers and improve the effective reporting of sexual abuse.

Academic and Wellness Outcomes Associated with use of Anki Spaced Repetition Software in Medical School.

OBJECTIVES: Medical students are increasingly using a spaced repetition software called Anki to study. There are limited studies evaluating the relationship between Anki and learner outcomes. In this study, we describe the history of Anki use in medical school and assess the potential relationships between use of Anki and medical student academic, extracurricular, and wellness outcomes. METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from a 50-item online survey and retrospective academic performance data from our institution's outcomes database. Participants were medical students. The survey assessed the frequency and timing of Anki use, student perceived stress, sleep quality, burnout risk, and involvement in extracurricular activities. Academic success was measured by USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores. RESULTS: 165 students responded survey. 92 (56%) identified as daily Anki users. Daily Anki use was correlated with increased Step 1 score (P = .039), but not Step 2 scores. There was an association between Anki use and increased sleep quality (P = .01), but no difference for other measurements of wellness or extracurricular involvement. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates potential benefits of daily use of Anki but also confirms that a variety of study methods can be used to achieve similar medical school outcomes.

The role of pay-for-performance in reducing healthcare disparities: A narrative literature review.

As American healthcare shifts to value-based payment, Pay-for-Performance (P4P) has become an important and controversial topic. One of the main controversies pertains to its potential to narrow or widen existing healthcare disparities depending on how the program is designed and implemented. It is thus imperative to understand which design features are most likely to reduce disparities. We conducted a systematic literature review from 2004 to 2021 of P4P's impact on disparities. Given the interdisciplinary nature of P4P research, multiple search strategies were combined, and many study designs were eligible for analysis. The literature was then qualitatively analyzed, with themes and major findings developed using Grounded Theory. Six major design features emerged as most promising in leveraging P4P to reduce disparities: 1) Risk/Case-Mix Adjustment; 2) Stratified Performance Measures/Stratification; 3) Disparity Reduction Metrics; 4) Exception Reporting; 5) Pay-for-Improvement; and 6) Population-Specific Metrics. Each design feature has its own mechanism, strengths, and weaknesses. We identify and define these features' direct and indirect effects on healthcare disparities. The interaction of each design feature with one another, with P4P as a whole, and within the larger reimbursement system can have considerable effects on disparities. Promising strategies exist to leverage P4P to narrow disparities for clinically and socially complex patients. The six design features discussed in this review help P4P programs address structural disadvantages faced by such patients and their providers. In regard to health equity, these design features can transform P4P from being part of the problem to being part of the solution.

PRescribing Interventions for Chronic pain using the Electronic health record (PRINCE): Study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is a frequent source of pain treatment and opioid prescribing. The objective of the Prescribing Interventions for Chronic Pain using the Electronic health record (PRINCE) study is to assess the effects of two behavioral economics-informed interventions embedded within the electronic health record (EHR) on guideline-concordant pain treatment and opioid prescribing decisions in primary care settings. METHODS: Setting: The setting for this study is 43 primary care clinics in Minnesota. DESIGN: The PRINCE study uses a cluster-randomized 2 × 2 factorial design to test the effects of two interventions. An adaptive design allows for the possibility of secondary randomization to test if interventions can be titrated while maintaining efficacy. INTERVENTIONS: One intervention alters the "choice architecture" within the EHR to nudge clinicians toward non-opioid treatments for opioid-naïve patients and toward tapering for patients currently receiving a "high risk" opioid. The other intervention integrates the prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) directly within the EHR. OUTCOME: The primary outcome for opioid-naïve patients is whether an opioid is prescribed in a primary care visit without a non-opioid alternative pain treatment. The primary outcome for current opioid-using patients is whether opioid prescriptions were tapered with a documented rationale. DISCUSSION: The PRINCE study will provide real-world evidence on two approaches to improving pain treatment in primary care using the EHR. The adaptive study design strikes a balance between establishing intervention efficacy and testing whether efficacy varies with intervention intensity.

Effect of Integrating Access to a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Within the Electronic Health Record on the Frequency of Queries by Primary Care Clinicians: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Tools that are directly integrated with the electronic health record (EHR) workflow can reduce the hassle cost of certain guideline-concordant practices, such as querying a prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) before prescribing opioids. Objective: To investigate the effect of integrating access to a PDMP within the EHR on the frequency of program queries by primary care clinicians. Design Settings and Participants: The PRINCE (Prescribing Interventions for Chronic Pain Using the Electronic Health Record) randomized trial used a factorial cluster design at the clinic level in 43 primary care clinics in Minnesota. In all, 309 clinicians participated; 161 clinicians were given EHR-integrated access to PDMP at the intervention clinics, and 148 clinicians had the usual access at the control clinics. The intervention went live on August 27, 2020, and data were collected through March 3, 2021. Intervention: Single sign-on access to the Minnesota PDMP was integrated into the EHR, allowing clinicians to query a patient's controlled substance prescription and dispensing history as recorded in the Minnesota PDMP directly from the patient's EHR record without logging into a separate web portal. Additionally, the integration tool alerted clinicians and reminded them to review the PDMP if a patient had 3 or more opioid prescriptions in the past year and 1 or more in the past 6 months. Clinics in the control group did not receive access to the EHR-integrated PDMP tool; instead, these participants logged into the PDMP web portal separately. Main Outcomes and Measures: Monthly PDMP query counts for primary care clinicians, overall and by modality (EHR-based, web-based, via a clinical delegate), adjusted for clinician characteristics, including type (physician, nurse practitioner, physician assistant), sex, and years in practice. Data were analyzed from August 2021 to May 2022. Results: Of the 43 participating clinics with 309 clinicians, 21 clinics with 161 clinicians (102 [63.4%] women; 114 [70.8%] physicians; tenure, 10.6 [4.4] years) received the PDMP integration intervention. Baseline unadjusted monthly PDMP query rates for the average clinician were 6.6 (95% CI, 4.4-9.9) vs 8.8 (95% CI, 6.0-13.1) queries in the control vs the PDMP integration group, respectively. During the intervention, PDMP query rates for the average clinician were 6.9 (95% CI, 4.7-10.3) vs 14.8 (95% CI, 10.0-22.0) queries among the control vs the PDMP integration group, respectively. Compared with the control group, the EHR-integrated PDMP tool produced a 60% greater increase in the relative change in monthly PDMP queries (95% CI, 51%-70%). An increase in PDMP queries via the EHR-integrated PDMP tool drove this increase, while web-based and delegate queries declined by 39% more among the intervention compared with the control group (95% CI, 34%-43%). Conclusions and Relevance: This cluster randomized clinical trial found that integrating access to the PDMP in the EHR increased PDMP-querying rates, suggesting that direct access reduced hassle costs and can dramatically improve adherence to guideline-concordant care practices among primary care clinicians. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04601506.

How Does Cognitive Bias Affect Conversations With Patients About Dietary Supplements?

Many patients use dietary supplements but do not inform their clinicians. Some allopathic clinicians' conscious and unconscious cognitive and emotional biases against complementary and alternative medicine can affect whether patients disclose details about dietary supplement use, the quality of communication during clinical encounters, and the information clinicians draw upon to make decisions and recommendations. This article describes 6 cognitive biases that can influence patient-clinician communication and shared decision making about dietary supplements and suggests 6 ways to mitigate biases' negative effects on patient-clinician relationships.

The language of less-lethal weapons.

It has been over 1 year since we observed the policing of the George Floyd protests in the United States [R. R. Hardeman, E. M. Medina, R. W. Boyd, N. Engl. J. Med. 383, 197-199 (2020)]. Multiple injury reports emerged in medical journals, and the scientific community called for law enforcement to discontinue the use of less-lethal weapons [E. A. Kaske et al., N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 774-775 (2021) and K. A. Olson et al., N. Engl. J. Med. 383, 1081-1083 (2020)]. Despite progress in research, policy change has not followed a similar pace. Although the reasoning for this discrepancy is multifactorial, failure to use appropriate language may be one contributing factor to the challenges faced in updating policies and practices. Here, we detail how language has the potential to influence thinking and decision-making, we discuss how the language of less-lethal weapons minimizes harm, and we provide a framework for naming conventions that acknowledges harm.

Diverse community leaders' perspectives about quality primary healthcare and healthcare measurement: Qualitative community-based participatory research.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare quality measurements in the United States illustrate disparities by racial/ethnic group, socio-economic class, and geographic location. Redressing healthcare inequities, including measurement of and reimbursement for healthcare quality, requires partnering with communities historically excluded from decision-making. Quality healthcare is measured according to insurers, professional organizations and government agencies, with little input from diverse communities. This community-based participatory research study aimed to amplify the voices of community leaders from seven diverse urban communities in Minneapolis-Saint Paul Minnesota, view quality healthcare and financial reimbursement based on quality metric scores. METHODS: A Community Engagement Team consisting of one community member from each of seven urban communities -Black/African American, Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender-Queer-Two Spirit, Hmong, Latino/a/x, Native American, Somali, and White-and two community-based researchers conducted listening sessions with 20 community leaders about quality primary healthcare. Transcripts were inductively analyzed and major themes were identified. RESULTS: Listening sessions produced three major themes, with recommended actions for primary care clinics. #1: Quality Clinics Utilize Structures and Processes that Support Healthcare Equity. #2: Quality Clinics Offer Effective Relationships, Education, and Health Promotion. #3: Funding Based on Current Quality Measures Perpetuates Health Inequities. CONCLUSION: Community leaders identified ideal characteristics of quality primary healthcare, most of which are not currently measured. They expressed concern that linking clinic payment with quality metrics without considering social and structural determinants of health perpetuates social injustice in healthcare.

Race and Gender Differences in Medical Student Perspectives on Social Determinants of Health Education: A Single-Institution Survey Study.

PURPOSE: The field of medicine is becoming increasingly aware of the role that social determinants of health (SDH) play in shaping health and health outcomes. Organized medicine - including prominent physician groups and accreditation bodies - has endorsed SDH education as an integral component of medical school curricula. This study sought to describe medical student perspectives on the current state of SDH in preclinical curricula. METHODS: The authors developed a 9-item survey to assess time being spent on SDH and attitudes toward the current level of SDH content in preclinical curricula. All medical students at both campuses of a large public medical school were invited to participate between December 2019 and February 2020. RESULTS: Of 1010 medical students invited to participate, 515 (51.0%) responded. Of the 515 respondents, 480 (93.2%) reported spending at least 40 hours per week on medical school, and of those, 405 (84.4%) said they spend 0-2 hours on SDH. The majority of all respondents (62.1%; 320/515) felt the current level of focus on SDH is "not enough", while only eleven students (2.1%; 11/515) felt it is "too much". In a multiple logistic model, Black students were over four times as likely as white students (aOR 4.19; 95% CI 1.37-18.38) to feel the current level of focus on SDH is "not enough". Likewise, women were 2.3-times (aOR 2.30; 95% CI 1.52-3.49) as likely as men to feel the level of focus on SDH is "not enough". CONCLUSION: In practice, medical students are spending considerably less time learning SDH than is advised by consensus of expert educators and administrators. Over sixty percent of medical students do not feel the current level of focus on SDH is sufficient. Further study is needed to determine why women and racial minority students are significantly more likely to feel this way.

The Consent Continuum: A New Model of Consent, Assent, and Nondissent for Primary Care.

The practice around informed consent in clinical medicine is both inconsistent and inadequate. Indeed, in busy, contemporary health care settings, getting informed consent looks little like the formal process developed over the past sixty years and presented in medical textbooks, journal articles, and academic lectures. In this article, members of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM) Collaborative on Ethics and Humanities review the conventional process of informed consent and its limitations, explore complementary and alternative approaches to doctor-patient interactions, and propose a new model of consent that integrates these approaches with each other and with clinical practice. The model assigns medical interventions to a consent continuum defined by the discrete categories of traditional informed consent, assent, and nondissent. Narrative descriptions and clinical exemplars are offered for each category. The authors invite colleagues from other disciplines and from the academic ethics community to provide feedback and commentary.

Docs with their eyes on the clock? The effect of time pressures on primary care productivity.

This paper examines how time pressure, an important constraint faced by medical care providers, affects productivity in primary care. We generate empirical predictions by incorporating time pressure into a model of physician behavior by Tai-Seale and McGuire (2012). We use data from the electronic health records of a large integrated delivery system and leverage unexpected schedule changes as variation in time pressure. We find that greater time pressure reduces the number of diagnoses recorded during a visit and increases both scheduled and unscheduled follow-up care. We also find some evidence of increased low-value care, decreased preventive care, and decreased opioid prescribing.

"An epoch-making and blessed moment in the history of medicine" -thoughts on international health equity and the Nobel prize in medicine.

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine is a prestigious award given every year for ostensibly the most important discovery in the field. Prizes in Medicine have typically gone to honor foundational knowledge rather than measurable impact. Two recent examples from global health (a rotavirus vaccine, child growth standards) offer alternatives for what might be lauded in medicine. These two examples and historical achievements regarding cholera and smallpox are worthy but do not fall within the scope of Nobel awards for Peace or Economics. The COVID-19 pandemic gives a new context for the idea that discovery and implementation are both keys to medicine. New patterns that redefine achievement in medicine could emerge by Nobel Prize precedent to promote greater health equity and international collaboration.