Risk factors for readmission with preeclampsia: a call for more preventative surveillance and counseling.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum readmission for preeclampsia is a difficult predicament for patients which creates financial, psychosocial, and physical stress. It is often a challenge to predict postpartum preeclampsia and therefore identify patients that may be at risk prior to discharge. This study aims to identify risk factors in patients that are at high risk for readmission due to preeclampsia. The identification of these risk factors may also lead to enhanced education and counseling prior to discharge. METHODS: Researchers conducted a case-control study using a data set collected from 2015 to 2022 looking at obstetric readmissions within 6 weeks of delivery and then stratified these patients for preeclampsia diagnosis. A control set was created within the healthcare system's electronic medical record's search tools for patients diagnosed with preeclampsia who were not readmitted to the hospital. This study evaluates 78 patients who were readmitted with a diagnosis of preeclampsia and compared to 77 patients who were diagnosed with preeclampsia who were not readmitted. Again, the aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for readmission among patients with preeclampsia. RESULTS: A multivariable logistic regression model was used to assess predictors which revealed that older age (OR 1.13, CI 1.03-1.24), no history of preeclampsia with or without severe features within pregnancy before delivery (OR 15.29, CI 5.56-41.98 and 13.58, CI 4.46-12.85), no aspirin use in pregnancy (OR 4.38, CI 2.02-9.48), and number of triage visits related to hypertension during prenatal care were all significant predictors for readmission due to preeclampsia. CONCLUSION: With these risk factors in mind, better counseling and preventative surveillance can be provided to patients. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of predictive models developed using these found risk factors.

Antimicrobial prescribing after rapid influenza PCR implementation in the emergency department.

INTRO: Influenza shares common symptoms with bacterial pneumonia, which may result in unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions in the emergency department (ED) when the diagnosis is unknown. Rapid influenza polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests have reduced turnaround times compared to standard multiplex PCR respiratory panels allowing for earlier diagnosis, which may improve antimicrobial stewardship outcomes in the ED. This study aims to compare antibiotic and antiviral use before and after deployment of the rapid influenza PCR in the ED. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, cohort study included pediatric and adult patients discharged from the ED with a positive influenza test using a standard multiplex PCR respiratory panel (January 2017 - July 2019) or rapid PCR (July 2019 - February 2020). The primary endpoint was number of antibiotic prescriptions pre- and post-implementation of the rapid influenza PCR in the ED. Secondary endpoints included number of antiviral prescriptions, duration of antimicrobial therapy, test turnaround time, ED length of stay, 30-day readmission, and adverse events. A multivariable logistic regression evaluated patient factors associated with antimicrobial prescribing. RESULTS: A total of 620 positive influenza results were identified with 280 patients (standard multiplex PCR = 33; rapid PCR = 247) meeting inclusion criteria. Patients were less likely to be prescribed antibiotics (39.4% vs 8.9%, OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.067-0.34) and more likely to be prescribed antivirals (24.2% vs 61.1%, OR 4.92, 95% CI 2.13-11.34) with the rapid influenza PCR. Rapid influenza PCR significantly reduced ED length of stay (4.9 vs 3.4 h, p < 0.01) and test turnaround time (27 h vs 3.5 h, p < 0.01). Patients at high risk for complications associated with influenza were more likely to be prescribed antiviral therapy (22.7% vs 67.8%, OR 7.16, 95% CI 2.52-20.40). Based on the regression analysis conducted, asthma, (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.48-8.26), immunosuppression (OR 9.6, 95% CI 1.18-78.2), and age <5 years old (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.80-5.45) were predictors of antiviral prescribing. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a rapid influenza PCR in the ED reduced antibiotic use and optimized antiviral therapy for patients with influenza including those at higher risk of complications.

Fluoroquinolone versus Beta-Lactam Oral Step-Down Therapy for Uncomplicated Streptococcal Bloodstream Infections.

Fluoroquinolones (FQs) are often preferred as oral step-down therapy for bloodstream infections (BSIs) due to favorable pharmacokinetic parameters; however, they are also associated with serious adverse events. The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcomes for patients who received an oral FQ versus an oral beta-lactam (BL) as step-down therapy for uncomplicated streptococcal BSIs. This multicenter, retrospective cohort study analyzed adult patients who completed therapy with an oral FQ or BL with at least one blood culture positive for a Streptococcus species from 1 January 2014 to 30 June 2019. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as the lack of all-cause mortality, recurrent BSI with the same organism, and infection-related readmission at 90 days. A multivariable logistic regression model for predictors of clinical failure was conducted. A total of 220 patients were included, with 87 (40%) receiving an FQ and 133 (60%) receiving a BL. Step-down therapy with an oral BL was noninferior to an oral FQ (93.2% versus 92.0%; mean difference, 1.2%; 90% confidence interval [CI], -5.2 to 7.8). No differences were seen in 90-day mortality, 90-day recurrent BSI, 90-day infection-related readmission, or 90-day incidence of Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhea. Predictors of clinical failure included oral step-down transition before day 3 (odds ratio [OR] = 5.18; 95% CI, 1.21, 22.16) and low-dose oral step-down therapy (OR = 2.74; 95% CI, 0.95, 7.90). Our results suggest that oral step-down therapy for uncomplicated streptococcal BSI with a BL is noninferior to an FQ.

Nonfatal Firearm Violence Trends on the Westside of Chicago Between 2005 and 2016.

This paper examines the epidemiology of nonfatal firearm violence (NFFV) on the Westside of Chicago over three finite time periods: 2005-2008, 2009-2012, and 2013-2016. The trend analysis will look at any significant changes over the time periods and describe the demographic characteristics of NFFV. A descriptive analysis of Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) Emergency Department (ED) data was conducted. NFFV patients were identified by specific firearm ICD-9 primary eCode injury categories: accident, assault, legal intervention, undetermined intent, suicide or self-inflicted injury, and legal intervention. The Pearson Chi-square test was conducted to statistically compare the categorical frequencies of the Chicago metropolitan region of injury, cause of firearm related injury, and place of injury by time period. There were a total of 3962 nonfatal hospitalizations at MSH between the three time periods due to gun violence related injuries. Overall, nonfatal hospitalizations were most frequent for those between age groups 16-24 (52.5%). The number of nonfatal hospitalizations decreased with increasing age for the age groups 35-44 (9.7%), 45-54 (3.2%), and > 54 (1.2%). There were significantly more nonfatal hospitalizations in males (n = 3649) than females (n = 312) across the three time periods. However, there was a 74.7% increase in female nonfatal hospitalizations from 2009-2012 to 2013-2016. There were significant racial differences in nonfatal hospitalizations between the three time periods. NFFV continues to be problem on the Westside of Chicago, particularly for young, Black men. The incidence of gun violence however has not changed significantly between 2005 and 2016.

Patient participation in clinical trials conducted by principal investigators who speak one or more language(s) beyond english: Exploring ethnicity as proxy for language.

Background: To explore the association between ethnicity, as a proxy for language, and participation in clinical trials (CT) conducted by Principal Investigators (PI) who speak one or more language in addition to English. Methods: This retrospective, descriptive study utilized CT participant demographic data extracted from the largest Midwestern non-profit healthcare system between January 1, 2019 and 12/31/2021. The CT participant sample (N = 4308) was divided for comparison: CT Participants of Hispanic or Latino Origin (N = 254; 5.90 %) and CT Participants of Non-Hispanic or Latino Origin (N = 4054; 94.10 %). Logistic regressions were performed to generate the crude and adjusted odds of patients of Hispanic or Latino origin participating in CTs conducted by PIs who speak another language in addition to English. Results: Crude analysis revealed that patients of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity had 2.04 (1.58, 2.64) times greater odds of participating in CTs conducted by PIs who speak another language than English (<0.0001), which increased to 2.67 (1.97, 3.62) times greater odds after adjusting for sex, race, age and insurance (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Overall findings indicate that patients of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, who are more likely to speak Spanish, have greater odds of participating in CTs conducted by PIs who speak another language beyond English. This may imply that cultural sensitivity at the top of a CT study team, as likely to be demonstrated by PIs who speak another language beyond English, may be an important contributor to reducing ethnicity- and language-based barriers to diversity in CTs and a relationship worth exploring further.

Trial staff and community member perceptions of barriers and solutions to improving racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trial participation; a mixed method study.

Background: The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials leads to skewed findings, limited generalizability, inequitable health outcomes for people of color, and insufficient access to innovative therapies. Our objective was to compare perceptions of barriers to participation in trials for people of color and trial staff to provide tangible solutions for improving diversity among study participants. Methods: This mixed method study utilized semi-structured interviews and surveys to evaluate barriers to participation and solutions to improve racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials among healthcare system trial staff and community members from the same region. Through thematic analysis via coded transcripts and quantitative analysis via survey data, social support theory constructs were identified to evaluate where perceptions of barriers and solutions overlap and where they diverge. Results: A total of 55 trial staff and 75 community members participated in the study. Trial staff identified logistics and patients' unwillingness to receive additional treatments as perceived barriers to participation, while community members stated lack of information and lack of trust in their care team. Both groups identified hesitance toward research as a prominent barrier. Solutions related to informational support demonstrated the most overlap between groups, while instrumental support showed the most discordance. Conclusion: Solutions for improving racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trial participation are multi-faceted and have various levels of impact. Overlap and discordance of opinions regarding solutions should be further evaluated, and implementation of solutions should be carefully considered.

Adoption of self-measured blood pressure monitoring in underserved communities: Program evaluation in primary care.

RATIONALE: Self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring is crucial for hypertension management, yet its adoption, particularly among disadvantaged populations, remains low. 'Love Your Heart' is a quality improvement program providing free standard SMBP devices to hypertensive patients, aiming to enhance adoption and assess its impact on blood pressure control. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This study evaluates the 'Love Your Heart' program's implementation success through assessing adoption rates and exploring changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) among participants. We aim to understand factors influencing adoption and potential benefits of SMBP monitoring in a diverse, socially disadvantaged patient population. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the 'Love Your Heart' program using electronic health records (EHR) at a primary care site in Chicago. Adult patients with hypertension were enroled in the 6-month program, which included education sessions and free SMBP devices. Adoption was measured by participation in program components, and changes in SBP were analysed based on adoption status. Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS software, adhering to STROBE reporting guidelines. RESULTS: Of 621 eligible patients, 104 participated, with 83 included in the evaluation. Despite all participants receiving free SMBP devices, adoption rates were modest, with only 7% sharing readings with the care team. However, patients who received device instructions demonstrated greater decreases in SBP compared to those who did not. Although not statistically significant, clinically meaningful decreases in SBP were observed among adopters. CONCLUSION: The 'Love Your Heart' program highlights the challenges of promoting SMBP monitoring among disadvantaged patient populations. While providing free devices addresses access barriers, low reporting to the care team suggests the need for further support mechanisms. Future research should explore strategies to enhance SMBP adoption and integration into clinical care, particularly in settings lacking automated data transmission systems.

A novel approach to assessing disparity in representativeness of clinical trial participants within a large midwestern healthcare system.

Background: Representativeness in clinical trials (CT) serves as a metric of access to healthcare and reflects differences that may determine differential efficacy of medical interventions; thus, quantifying representativeness in CT participation is critical. Methods: This retrospective, descriptive study utilized patient demographic data extracted from the largest Midwestern non-profit healthcare system. Using data between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2021, a CT Participant Sample of 4,537 system patients who were active CT participants was compared to a CT Patient Population of 195,726 system patients receiving care by the PI of active CTs, which represented the target population. Chi-square goodness-of-fit tests were used to test differences in distributions of demographic variables between groups, indicating disparity in CT participation. Two metrics adapted from literature - participation incidence disparity (PID) and participation incidence ratio (PIR) - were calculated to quantify absolute and relative disparity in representativeness proportions, respectively. Descriptive approaches to assessing representativeness are also provided. Results: Results showed significant differences by race/ethnicity (χ2 = 50.64; p < 0.0001), age categories (χ2 = 56.64; p < 0.0001), and insurance (χ2 = 41.29; p < 0.0001). PID and PIR metrics revealed reduced CT participation among non-White racial/ethnic groups and increased CT participation among White Non-Hispanic patients. Further, CT participants ≥80 or Worker's Compensation were underrepresented while those with Self-Pay insurance were overrepresented as CT participants. Conclusions: Despite progress, continued efforts to not only enroll participants into CTs that are representative of the healthcare system and region, but also to better assess representativeness quantitatively are still needed.

The Benefits of Introducing a Pregnancy Support Tool for Low-Income Women During Routine Obstetrics Care.

The objective of the CONTINUE (conversations in routine OB care) pilot study was to gather preliminary data on the benefits of integrating a well-designed pregnancy support tool ("CONTINUE Tool") in low-income prenatal care. A total of 184 tools were distributed by 21 OB providers during the study implementation period. Follow-up data were collected from 71 (38.5%) prenatal patients across three community-based midwestern OB clinics serving a diverse prenatal patient population. Early-gestation prenatal patients received the strategically designed CONTINUE Tool during routine prenatal care and later completed a semi-structured interview or electronic survey to report pre-determined individual benefit items experienced due to tool usage. Factor analysis used individual benefit items to identify factors representing common underlying benefits ("factor benefits"). Logistic regression analyses were performed to describe the relative odds of participants with low income (public insurance) experiencing individual and factor benefits of tool use compared to participants of higher income (private insurance). Chi square tests (or Fisher's exact tests) were performed to generate P values reflecting statistically significant differences by income group. More low-income prenatal participants reported experiencing individual benefits as compared to higher-income participants. Among factor benefits, low-income participants were statistically more likely to report experiencing a time-related logistics benefit (OR = 4.00; 95% CI 1.02-15.73; P = .045). Low-income participants reported experiencing an overall logistics factor benefit (OR = 4.29; 95% CI 0.47-38.75), including a cost-related logistics benefit (OR = 3.08; CI 0.59-16.00), as well as an understanding benefit (OR = 1.90; 95% CI 0.72-5.04) and a self-efficacy benefit (OR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.44-3.87). While this study is limited by sample size due to being a pilot study, the findings suggest there may be tangible benefits to introducing the CONTINUE Tool among low-income prenatal patients. Given the staggering inequity in OB care and subsequent health outcomes, any preliminary findings on ways to help combat this are necessary and should lay the groundwork for subsequent randomized trials. Our preliminary findings show that supplementing routine OB care with the CONTINUE Tool can confer benefits to both providers and patients, but particularly for low-income prenatal patients who tend to have more structural barriers to adequate care in the first place.

The potential impact of introducing a cost tool to facilitate cost-of-care conversations in routine OB care: Lessons from the CONTINUE pilot study.

Objective: The objective of the CONTINUE study is to gather preliminary data on the potential impact of implementing a "Cost Tool" in routine obstetrics (OB) care. It is hypothesized that by providing prenatal patients with an ability to forecast their care plan, they would be better able to anticipate and plan for the costs associated with their prenatal care. Methods: Pilot data from interviews and surveys were collected from 71 prenatal patients across three clinics throughout Chicago, IL. Results: As compared to privately insured prenatal patients, prenatal patients with public insurance reported the most benefit in Cost Tool use. Specifically, that the Cost Tool helped to navigate insurance more effectively (OR 4.49, p=0.0254), see the "Big Picture" and link it to the family budget (OR 4.25, p=0.0099), and make the financial tradeoffs needed to get through pregnancy (OR 5.50, p=0.0305). Conclusion: The CONTINUE study provides preliminary signals of the Cost Tool's potential to help publicly insured prenatal patients better navigate the costs associated with their care plan. Innovations: The CONTINUE study contributes valuable preliminary data about the utility of a cost tool in routine OB care, especially as it may benefit low-income prenatal patients navigate prenatal care better.

Arytenoid adduction asymmetries in persons with and without voice disorders.

Asymmetry of the arytenoid complex is considered when evaluating a patient for a voice disorder. This study sought to determine if there were differences in arytenoid adduction asymmetry in persons with and without voice disorders. Three aspects of arytenoid adduction asymmetry were judged from still frames of the arytenoids in the adducted position from stroboscopy recordings of 52 vocally normal speakers and 54 persons with voice disorders. Asymmetry of the arytenoids was prevalent in both normophonic and dysphonic speakers. The lack of strong differences in the prevalence of arytenoid asymmetries in the adducted position between normophonic and dysphonic speakers suggests that caution should be taken when using these asymmetries as indicator of or related to a voice disorder.