Group Multimodal Prenatal Care and Postpartum Outcomes.

Importance: An increasing body of evidence suggests equivalent if not improved postpartum outcomes of in-person group prenatal care compared with individual prenatal care. However, research is needed to evaluate outcomes of group multimodal prenatal care (GMPC), with groups delivered virtually in combination with individual in-person office appointments to collect vital signs and conduct other tests compared with individual multimodal prenatal care (IMPC) delivered through a combination of remotely delivered and in-person visits. Objective: To compare postpartum outcomes between GMPC and IMPC. Design, Setting, and Participants: A frequency-matched longitudinal cohort study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, an integrated health care delivery system. Participants included 424 individuals who were pregnant (212 GMPC and 212 frequency-matched IMPC controls (matched on gestational age, race and ethnicity, insurance status, and maternal age) receiving prenatal care between August 17, 2020, and April 1, 2021. Participants completed a baseline survey before 14 weeks' gestation and a follow-up survey between 4 and 8 weeks post partum. Data analysis was performed from January 3, 2022, to March 4, 2024. Exposure: GMPC vs IMPC. Main Outcome Measures: Validated instruments were used to ascertain postpartum psychosocial outcomes (stress, depression, anxiety) and perceived quality of prenatal care. Self-reported outcomes included behavioral outcomes (breastfeeding initiation, use of long-acting reversible contraception), satisfaction with prenatal care, and preparation for self and baby care after delivery. Primary analyses included all study participants in the final cohort. Three secondary dose-stratified analyses included individuals who attended at least 1 visit, 5 visits, and 70% of visits. Log-binomial regression and linear regression analyses were conducted. Results: The final analytic cohort of 390 participants (95.6% follow-up rate of 408 singleton live births) was racially and ethnically diverse: 98 (25.1%) Asian/Pacific Islander, 88 (22.6%) Hispanic, 17 (4.4%) non-Hispanic Black, 161 (41.3%) non-Hispanic White, and 26 (6.7%) multiracial participants; median age was 32 (IQR, 30-35) years. In the primary analysis, after adjustment, GMPC was associated with a 21% decreased risk of perceived stress (adjusted risk ratio [ARR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.94) compared with IMPC. Findings were consistent in the dose-stratified analyses. There were no significant differences between GMPC and IMPC for other psychosocial outcomes. While in the primary analyses there was no significant group differences in perceived quality of prenatal care (mean difference [MD], 0.01; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.15) and feeling prepared to take care of baby at home (ARR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.96-1.23), the dose-stratified analyses documented higher perceived quality of prenatal care (MD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.01-0.31) and preparation for taking care of baby at home (ARR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.13-1.43) for GMPC among those attending 70% of visits. No significant differences were noted in patient overall satisfaction with prenatal care and feeling prepared for taking care of themselves after delivery. Conclusions: In this cohort study, equivalent and, in some cases, better outcomes were observed for GMPC compared with IMPC. Health care systems implementing multimodal models of care may consider incorporating virtual group prenatal care as a prenatal care option for patients.

The dynamics and outcomes of AKI progression during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Acute kidney injury (AKI) associated with COVID-19 is associated with poor prognosis. This study assessed the hitherto uninvestigated impact of COVID-19 on the progression and clinical outcomes of patients with AKI. METHODS: Data from 576 patients with AKI admitted between 13/3/20 and 13/5/20 were studied. Increasingly complex analyses, from logistic regressions to competing-risk and multi-state models, have revealed insights into AKI progression dynamics associated with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 acquisition and death. Meta-analyses of case fatality ratios among patients with AKI were also conducted. RESULTS: The overall case-fatality ratio was 0.33 [95% CI (0.20-0.36)]; higher in COVID-19 positive (COVID+) patients 0.52 [95% CI (0.46-0.58)] than in their negative (COVID-) counterparts 0.16 [95% CI (0.12-0.20)]. In AKI Stage-3 patients, that was 0.71 [95% CI (0.64-0.79)] among COVID+ patients with 45% dead within 14 days and 0.35 [95% CI (0.25-0.44)] in the COVID- group and 28% died within 14 days. Among patients diagnosed with AKI Stage-1 within 24 h, the probability of progression to AKI Stage-3 on day 7 post admission was 0.22 [95% CI (0.17-0.27)] among COVID+ patients, and 0.06 [95% CI (0.03, 0.09)] among those who tested negative. The probability of discharge by day 7 was 0.71 [95% CI (0.66, 0.75)] in COVID- patients, and 0.27 [95% CI (0.21, 0.32)] in COVID+ patients. By day 14, in AKI Stage-3 COVID+ patients, that was 0.35 [95% CI (0.25, 0.44)] with little change by day 10, that is, 0.38 [95% CI (0.29, 0.47)]. CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with either a rapid progression in severity, prolonged hospital care, or high case fatality ratio among AKI Stage-3 patients, significantly exacerbated by COVID-19 infection.

Real-world evaluation of an acceptance and commitment therapy-based group programme for breast cancer survivors with fear of cancer recurrence.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of a 6-week acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)-based group programme on participants' fear of cancer recurrence (FCR), quality of life (QoL), psychological distress and psychological flexibility at the end of the programme and 12-week follow-up. METHODS: A one-group, post-test service evaluation of a real-world psychological programme was carried out to evaluate collected outcome measures and attendance for a total of 21 groups facilitated between 2017 and 2019. Participants were breast cancer survivors who attended a 6-week group programme led by NHS clinicians. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVA analyses were carried out for each outcome measure. Attendance levels were examined to assess acceptability. RESULTS: A total of 97 group participants who had completed curative treatment for breast cancer took part. Of whom, 89% completed at least 4 of the 6 weekly group sessions and 76% attended the 12-week follow-up session. Eighty-four (87%) participants returned outcome measures at all three time points relative to group participation (T1 = pre, T2 = post T3 = 12-week follow-up). Group participants were female, mean age 51.9 years. FCR was highest at T1 (mean 25.2, SD 4.7), reduced T2 (mean 21.2, SD 5.4) and further lowered T3 (mean 19.5, SD 6.2). This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). QoL was lowest at T1 (mean 62.4, SD 15.7), increased T2 (mean 71.7, SD 18.1) and further increased at T3 (mean 75.9, SD 17.5). This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Psychological distress measures were shown to reduce, and psychological flexibility increased. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world evaluation of an ACT-based group programme led to improvements in FCR, QoL, psychological distress and psychological flexibility in this population. This evaluation provides basis for further investigation to determine if these results can be replicated by controlled research design across diverse populations.

Reproductive health outcomes of insured adolescent and adult women who access oral levonorgestrel emergency contraception.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of risk for adolescents and women who seek emergency contraception through various clinical routes and the opportunities for improved care provision. METHODS: This study looked at a retrospective cohort to assess contraception and other reproductive health outcomes among adolescents and women aged 15-44 years who accessed oral levonorgestrel emergency contraception through an office visit or the call center at Kaiser Permanente Northern California from 2010 to 2011. RESULTS: Of 21,421 prescriptions, 14,531 (67.8%) were accessed through the call center. In the subsequent 12 months, 12,127 (56.6%) adolescents and women had short-acting contraception (pills, patches, rings, depot medroxyprogesterone) dispensed and 2,264 (10.6%) initiated very effective contraception (intrauterine contraception, implants, sterilization). Initiation of very effective contraception was similar for adolescents and women who accessed it through the call center-1,569 (10.8%) and office visits-695 (10.1%) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.13). In the subsequent 6 months, 2,056 (9.6%) adolescents and women became pregnant. Adolescents and women who accessed emergency contraception through the call center were less likely to become pregnant within 3 months of accessing emergency contraception than woman who accessed it through office visits (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.94); however, they were more likely to become pregnant within 4-6 months (adjusted OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.16-1.60). Among adolescents and women who were tested for chlamydia and gonorrhea, 689 (7.8%) and 928 (7.9%) were positive in the 12 months before and after accessing emergency contraception, respectively. CONCLUSION: Protocols to routinely address unmet needs for contraception at every call for emergency contraception and all office visits, including visits with primary care providers, should be investigated.

Does the diagnosis of breast or ovarian cancer trigger referral to genetic counseling?

OBJECTIVE: Kaiser Permanente Northern California is a large integrated health care delivery system in the United States that has guidelines for referring women with newly diagnosed BRCA1-and BRCA2-associated cancers for genetic counseling. This study assesses adherence to genetic counseling referral guidelines within this health system. METHODS: Chart review was performed to identify patients with cancer who met the following pathology-based Kaiser Permanente Northern California guidelines for referral for genetic counseling: invasive breast cancer, younger than age 40; nonmucinous epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer, younger than age 60; women with synchronous or metachronous primary cancers of the breast and ovaries; and male breast cancer. We assessed compliance with referral guidelines. An electronic notice was sent to the managing physician of patients with newly diagnosed cancer to assess the feasibility of this intervention. RESULTS: A total of 340 patients were identified with breast cancer at younger than age 40 or with ovarian, peritoneal, or tubal cancer between January and June, 2008. Upon chart review, 105 of these patients met pathology-based criteria for referral to genetic counseling, of whom 47 (45%) were referred within the 2-year study period. Of the 67 subjects with breast cancer, 40 subjects (60%) were referred. In contrast, only 7 (21%) of 33 patients with ovarian cancer were referred (P < 0.001). A pilot study was performed to test the feasibility of notifying managing oncologists with an electronic letter alerting them of eligibility for genetic referral of patients with new diagnosis (n = 21). In the 3 to 6 months after this notification, 12 of these 21 patients were referred for counseling including 5 of 7 patients with a diagnosis of ovarian cancer. CONCLUSION: There is a missed opportunity for referring patients to genetic counseling, especially among patients with ovarian cancer. A pilot study suggests that alerting treating physicians is a feasible strategy to increase appropriate referral.

Patients' perspectives on nonadherence to statin therapy: a focus-group study.

CONTEXT: Nonadherence to statin therapy is associated with poor cardiovascular outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We explored factors and perceptions that contribute to statin therapy nonadherence. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study that was based on three patient focus groups using a structured discussion guide to explore factors related to statin therapy nonadherence, information sources, perceptions of statins and cardiovascular risks factors, and suggestions for improving adherence. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 18 adult patients of an integrated delivery system who had been newly prescribed a statin between November 2006 and August 2007, with a subsequent one- to six-month gap in drug supply as documented by automated pharmacy data. MEASURES: We performed content analysis of verbatim focus-group transcripts to assess themes within each domain. RESULTS: Study participants identified many factors that contributed to their statin therapy nonadherence, including concerns or experiences with adverse effects, uncertainty about the benefits or importance of statins for their overall health, and lack of convenience. Concerns about the adverse effects of statins were a dominant theme. Although most participants believed that having a high cholesterol level is unsafe, many were unsure about their personal need for statins if they were making other lifestyle changes or had only borderline high cholesterol levels. Participants suggested that systematic follow-up, as well as greater information about the risks and benefits of statins and the merits of alternative approaches for lowering cholesterol, could have improved their adherence to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients reduced statin use because of concerns about adverse effects and desire for more information about statins. Effective interventions that address patients' underlying concerns and perceptions are needed to improve statin therapy adherence.