Transforming the endocrine consult: asynchronous provider consultations.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of virtual consultations on the spectrum and volume of endocrine consults, access to endocrine care, and downstream healthcare utilization. METHODS: A program (eConsults) designed to enable and reimburse asynchronous consultations between primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists at the University of California, San Francisco, was launched in 2012. All eConsults (n = 158) submitted to endocrinology over the first year were analyzed for clinical focus and use of structured referral templates. PCP compliance with specialist recommendations was measured and stratified by provider type. Impact on endocrine referral volume was calculated using simple linear regression. Changes in wait times to endocrine care were analyzed comparing administrative data from the year of and the year prior to the introduction of eConsults. Downstream endocrine office visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations were captured by chart abstraction for all standard endocrine eConsults (n = 113). RESULTS: The proportion of endocrine referrals sent as eConsults (15 to 22%) was significantly higher than the combined average for all other participating specialties (7.4%) (P<.001). Overall, 76.0% of endocrinologist recommendations were fully implemented. There was no induced demand in total volume of referrals to endocrinology, and introduction of eConsults significantly improved access to endocrine care (odds ratio, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 2.7 to 4.9). Rates of downstream healthcare utilization within 6 months of a completed eConsult were low. CONCLUSION: Use of virtual consultations in a fee-for-service, academic medical center setting significantly improved access to endocrine care and the quality of referrals. Increasing recognition and reimbursement of nontraditional consultation models will be essential to scaling and disseminating these programs.

Analysis of an electronic consultation program at an academic medical centre: Primary care provider questions, specialist responses, and primary care provider actions.

Introduction Electronic consultations (eConsults) increase access to specialty care, but little is known about the types of questions primary care providers (PCPs) ask through eConsults, and how they respond to specialist recommendations. Methods This is a retrospective descriptive analysis of the first 200 eConsults completed in the UCSF eConsult program. Participating PCPs were from eight adult primary care sites at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), USA. Medicine subspecialties participating were Cardiology, Endocrinology, Gastroenterology/hepatology, Hematology, Infectious diseases, Nephrology, Pulmonary medicine, Rheumatology, and Sleep medicine. We categorized eConsult questions into "diagnosis," "treatment," and/or "monitoring." We performed medical record reviews to determine the percentage of specialist recommendations PCPs implemented, and the proportion of patients with a specialist visit in the same specialty as the eConsult, emergency department visit, or hospital admission during the subsequent six months. Results PCP questions related to diagnosis in 71% of cases, treatment in 46%, and monitoring in 21%. Specialist responses related to diagnosis in 76% of cases, treatment in 64%, and monitoring in 40%. PCPs ordered 79% of all recommended laboratory tests, 86% of recommended imaging tests and procedures, 65% of recommended new medications, and 73% of recommended medication changes. In the six months after the eConsult, 14% of patients had a specialist visit within the UCSF system in the same specialty as the eConsult. Discussion eConsults provide guidance to PCPs across the spectrum of patient care. PCPs implement specialists' recommendations in the large majority of cases, and few patients subsequently require in-person specialty care related to the reason for the eConsult.

Anxiety, anger, and mortality risk among survivors of myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Although there is evidence that anxiety and anger are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events, studies examining the relationship between these stressors and prognosis following myocardial infarction have been mixed. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 1968 participants (average age 60.2 years, 30.6% women) in the Determinants of Myocardial Infarction Onset Study recruited at the time of admission for myocardial infarction between 1989 and 1996. We used the state anxiety and anger subscales of the State-Trait Personality Inventory. Participants were followed for all-cause mortality through December 31, 2007 using the National Death Index. We constructed multivariable Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for demographic, behavioral, and clinical confounders and calculated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to examine the relationship between high levels of anxiety and anger and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Over 10 years of follow-up, 525 participants died. Compared with those scoring lower, an anxiety score >90(th) percentile was associated with a 1.31-times (95% CI, 0.93-1.84) higher mortality rate. The association was apparent in the first 3 years (HR 1.78; 95% CI 1.08-2.93), but not thereafter. Likewise, an anger score >90(th) percentile was associated with a 1.25-times (95% CI, 0.87-1.80) higher mortality rate. The association was higher in the first 3 years (HR 1.58; 95% CI, 0.91-2.74) than in subsequent years, but it was not statistically significant during either follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of myocardial infarction survivors, a high level of anxiety was associated with all-cause mortality, with the strongest association in the first 3 years of follow-up.