Primary Care Access to New Patient Appointments for California Medicaid Enrollees: A Simulated Patient Study.

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to evaluate variation in the availability of primary care new patient appointments for Medi-Cal (California Medicaid) enrollees in Northern California, and its relationship to emergency department (ED) use after Medicaid expansion. METHODS: We placed simulated calls by purported Medi-Cal enrollees to 581 primary care clinicians (PCCs) listed as accepting new patients in online directories of Medi-Cal managed care plans. Data from the California Health Interview Survey, Medi-Cal enrollment reports, and California hospital discharge records were used in analyses. We developed multilevel, mixed-effect models to evaluate variation in appointment access. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the relationship between primary care access and ED use by county. RESULTS: Availability of PCC new patient appointments to Medi-Cal enrollees lacking a PCC varied significantly across counties in the multilevel model, ranging from 77 enrollees (95% CI, 70-81) to 472 enrollees (95% CI, 378-628) per each available new patient appointment. Just 19% of PCCs had available appointments within the state-mandated 10 business days. Clinicians at Federally Qualified Health Centers had higher availability of new patient appointments (rate ratio = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.24-1.97). Counties with poorer PCC access had higher ED use by Medi-Cal enrollees. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to findings from other states, access to primary care in Northern California was limited for new patient Medi-Cal enrollees and varied across counties, despite standard statewide reimbursement rates. Counties with more limited access to primary care new patient appointments had higher ED use by Medi-Cal enrollees.

Predictors of Hospital Admission and Urological Intervention in Adult Emergency Department Patients with Computerized Tomography Confirmed Ureteral Stones.

PURPOSE: More than 1 million patients annually seek care in an emergency department for kidney stones but a minority require hospital admission or a urological procedure. We describe predictors of hospital admission or urological intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This secondary analysis of prospective data included patients with an obstructing ureteral stone that was confirmed by computerized tomography in an emergency department. All patients also underwent point of care limited renal ultrasound. The need for urological intervention at 90 days was assessed by a followup interview. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of admission and urological intervention, which were further stratified by disposition. Separate regression models with and without computerized tomography findings (point of care limited renal ultrasound only) were compared using c-statistics. RESULTS: Among a cohort of 475 patients with a symptomatic stone on computerized tomography 95 (20%) were admitted and 68 (72%) received an intervention. Of 380 discharged patients 66 (17%) required urological intervention. Admitted patients were more likely to have undergone a prior procedure, have evidence of kidney injury or infection, need opiate analgesia or have larger stones or hydronephrosis on point of care limited renal ultrasound. Predictors of intervention varied by disposition. However, regression models with and without computerized tomography findings demonstrated similar c-statistics. Discharged patients with larger stones, a longer pain duration at presentation and prior procedures were more likely to undergo intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention was common among admitted patients but it occurred in a minority of those discharged. Predictors of intervention varied by disposition. Models incorporating computerized tomography findings were similar to those that did not incorporate such findings. These data support ultrasound first or delayed computerized tomography diagnostic pathways for patients deemed clinically suitable for discharge home.

Ureteral Stones: Implementation of a Reduced-Dose CT Protocol in Patients in the Emergency Department with Moderate to High Likelihood of Calculi on the Basis of STONE Score.

Purpose To determine if a reduced-dose computed tomography (CT) protocol could effectively help to identify patients in the emergency department (ED) with moderate to high likelihood of calculi who would require urologic intervention within 90 days. Materials and Methods The study was approved by the institutional review board and written informed consent with HIPAA authorization was obtained. This was a prospective, single-center study of patients in the ED with moderate to high likelihood of ureteral stone undergoing CT imaging. Objective likelihood of ureteral stone was determined by using the previously derived and validated STONE clinical prediction rule, which includes five elements: sex, timing, origin, nausea, and erythrocytes. All patients with high STONE score (STONE score, 10-13) underwent reduced-dose CT, while those with moderate likelihood of ureteral stone (moderate STONE score, 6-9) underwent reduced-dose CT or standard CT based on clinician discretion. Patients were followed to 90 days after initial imaging for clinical course and for the primary outcome of any intervention. Statistics are primarily descriptive and are reported as percentages, sensitivities, and specificities with 95% confidence intervals. Results There were 264 participants enrolled and 165 reduced-dose CTs performed; of these participants, 108 underwent reduced-dose CT alone with complete follow-up. Overall, 46 of 264 (17.4%) of patients underwent urologic intervention, and 25 of 108 (23.1%) patients who underwent reduced-dose CT underwent a urologic intervention; all were correctly diagnosed on the clinical report of the reduced-dose CT (sensitivity, 100%; 95% confidence interval: 86.7%, 100%). The average dose-length product for all standard-dose CTs was 857 mGy · cm ± 395 compared with 101 mGy · cm ± 39 for all reduced-dose CTs (average dose reduction, 88.2%). There were five interventions for nonurologic causes, three of which were urgent and none of which were missed when reduced-dose CT was performed. Conclusion A CT protocol with over 85% dose reduction can be used in patients with moderate to high likelihood of ureteral stone to safely and effectively identify patients in the ED who will require urologic intervention. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

STONE PLUS: Evaluation of Emergency Department Patients With Suspected Renal Colic, Using a Clinical Prediction Tool Combined With Point-of-Care Limited Ultrasonography.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We determine whether renal point-of-care limited ultrasonography (PLUS) used in conjunction with the Sex, Timing, Origin, Nausea, Erythrocytes (STONE) clinical prediction score can aid identification of emergency department (ED) patients with uncomplicated ureteral stone or need for urologic intervention. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of adult ED patients undergoing computed tomography (CT) scan for suspected ureteral stone. The previously validated STONE score classifies patients into risk categories of low (≈10%), moderate (≈50%), or high (≈90%) for symptomatic stone. Renal PLUS assessed for presence of hydronephrosis before CT scanning. The primary outcomes of symptomatic ureteral stone or acutely important alternative finding were abstracted from CT reports. The secondary outcome, urologic intervention, was assessed by 90-day follow-up interview and record review. RESULTS: Of 835 enrolled patients, ureteral stone was identified in 53%, whereas 6.5% had an acutely important alternative finding on CT. Renal PLUS modestly increased sensitivity for symptomatic stone among low and moderate STONE score categories. Moderate or greater hydronephrosis improved specificity from 67% (62% to 72%) to 98% (93% to 99%) and 42% (37% to 47%) to 92% (86% to 95%) in low- and moderate-risk patients, with likelihood ratios of 22 (95% CI, 4.2-111) and 4.9 (95% CI, 2.9-8.3), respectively. Test characteristics among high-risk patients were unchanged by renal PLUS. For urologic intervention, any hydronephrosis was 66% sensitive (57% to 74%), whereas moderate or greater hydronephrosis was 86% specific overall (83% to 89%) and 81% (69% to 90%) sensitive and 79% 95% CI, (73-84) specific among patients with the highest likelihood of symptomatic stone. CONCLUSION: Hydronephrosis on renal PLUS modestly improved risk stratification in low- and moderate-risk STONE score patients. The presence or absence of hydronephrosis among high-risk patients did not significantly alter likelihood of symptomatic stone but may aid in identifying patients more likely to require urologic intervention.

Accuracy of reduced-dose computed tomography for ureteral stones in emergency department patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Reduced-dose computed tomography (CT) scans have been recommended for diagnosis of kidney stone but are rarely used in the emergency department (ED) setting. Test characteristics are incompletely characterized, particularly in obese patients. Our primary outcome is to determine the sensitivity and specificity of a reduced-dose CT protocol for symptomatic ureteral stones, particularly those large enough to require intervention, using a protocol stratified by patient size. METHODS: This was a prospective, blinded observational study of 201 patients at an academic medical center. Consenting subjects underwent both regular- and reduced-dose CT, stratified into a high and low body mass index (BMI) protocol based on effective abdominal diameter. Reduced-dose CT scans were interpreted by radiologists blinded to regular-dose interpretations. Follow-up for outcome and intervention was performed at 90 days. RESULTS: CT scans with both regular and reduced doses were conducted for 201 patients, with 63% receiving the high BMI reduced-dose protocol. Ureteral stone was identified in 102 patients (50.7%) of those receiving regular-dose CT, with a ureteral stone greater than 5 mm identified in 26 subjects (12.9%). Sensitivity of the reduced-dose CT for any ureteral stone was 90.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82.3% to 95.0%), with a specificity of 99.0% (95% CI 93.7% to 100.0%). For stones greater than 5 mm, sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 85.0% to 100.0%). Reduced-dose CT identified 96% of patients who required intervention for ureteral stone within 90 days. Mean reduction in size-specific dose estimate was 18.6 milligray (mGy), from 21.7 mGy (SD 9.7) to 3.4 mGy (SD 0.9). CONCLUSION: CT with substantial dose reduction was 90.2% (95% CI 82.3% to 95.0%) sensitive and 98.9% (95% CI 85.0% to 100.0%) specific for ureteral stones in ED patients with a wide range of BMIs. Reduced-dose CT was 96.0% (95% CI 80.5% to 99.3%) sensitive for ureteral stones requiring intervention within 90 days.

Effect of provider experience on clinician-performed ultrasonography for hydronephrosis in patients with suspected renal colic.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Hydronephrosis is readily visible on ultrasonography and is a strong predictor of ureteral stones, but ultrasonography is a user-dependent technology and the test characteristics of clinician-performed ultrasonography for hydronephrosis are incompletely characterized, as is the effect of ultrasound fellowship training on predictive accuracy. We seek to determine the test characteristics of ultrasonography for detecting hydronephrosis when performed by clinicians with a wide range of experience under conditions of direct patient care. METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients presenting to an academic medical center emergency department with suspected renal colic. Before computed tomography (CT) results, an emergency clinician performed bedside ultrasonography, recording the presence and degree of hydronephrosis. CT data were abstracted from the dictated radiology report by an investigator blinded to the bedside ultrasonographic results. Test characteristics of bedside ultrasonography for hydronephrosis were calculated with the CT scan as the reference standard, with test characteristics compared by clinician experience stratified into 4 levels: attending physicians with emergency ultrasound fellowship training, attending physicians without emergency ultrasound fellowship training, ultrasound experienced non-attending physician clinicians (at least 2 weeks of ultrasound training), and ultrasound inexperienced non-attending physician clinicians (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, off-service rotators, and first-year emergency medicine residents with fewer than 2 weeks of ultrasound training). RESULTS: There were 670 interpretable bedside ultrasonographic tests performed by 144 unique clinicians, 80.9% of which were performed by clinicians directly involved in the care of the patient. On CT, 47.5% of all subjects had hydronephrosis and 47.0% had a ureteral stone. Among all clinicians, ultrasonography had a sensitivity of 72.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 65.4% to 78.9%), specificity of 73.3% (95% CI 66.1% to 79.4%), positive likelihood ratio of 2.72 (95% CI 2.25 to 3.27), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.37 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.44) for hydronephrosis, using hydronephrosis on CT as the criterion standard. Among attending physicians with fellowship training, ultrasonography had sensitivity of 92.7% (95% CI 83.8% to 96.9%), positive likelihood ratio of 4.97 (95% CI 2.90 to 8.51), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.08 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.23). CONCLUSION: Overall, ultrasonography performed by emergency clinicians was moderately sensitive and specific for detection of hydronephrosis as seen on CT in patients with suspected renal colic. However, presence or absence of hydronephrosis as determined by emergency physicians with fellowship training in ultrasonography yielded more definitive test results. For clinicians without fellowship training, there was no significant difference between groups in the predictive accuracy of the application according to experience level.

Patient concerns and physician strategies for addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 vaccination is critical for reducing serious illness and hospitalizations, yet many remain hesitant. We conducted a survey of frontline physicians to identify patient concerns and physician strategies to address COVID-19 vaccine-hesitancy. METHODS: A national random sample of physicians in frontline specialties selected from a comprehensive list of practicing physicians in the U.S. were emailed a survey in August 2021. Multiple choice and open-ended questions inquired about patient concerns related to the COVID-19 vaccines and strategies used by physicians to counter vaccine misinformation and encourage vaccine-hesitant patients. Weighting was applied to achieve representativeness and reduce non-response bias. Network analysis examined co-occurring patient concerns. Open-ended responses on communication strategies were coded via thematic analysis. Multi-variable logistic regression examined associations between physician and pandemic characteristics with patient concerns and use of communication strategies. RESULTS: 531 physicians responded: primary care (241); emergency medicine (142); critical care (84); hospitalists (34); and infectious disease (30). Weighted response balance statistics showed excellent balance between respondents and nonrespondents. On average, physicians reported four patient vaccine concerns. Safety, side effects, vaccine misinformation, and mistrust in government were most common, and often co-occurring. 297 physicians described communication strategies: 180 (61 %) provided vaccine education and 94 (32 %) created a safe space for vaccine discussion. Narrative responses from physicians provided compelling examples of both successes and communication challenges arising from misinformation. Compared with emergency medicine, critical care (OR 2.45, 95 % CI 1.14, 5.24), infectious disease (OR 2.45, 95 % CI 1.00, 6.02), and primary care physicians (OR 1.66, 95 % CI 1.02, 2.70) were more likely to provide communication strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Many physicians engage with vaccine hesitant patients using a variety of strategies. Dissemination of effective system and physician-level communication interventions could enhance physician success.

Bridging the digital health divide-patient experiences with mobile integrated health and facilitated telehealth by community-level indicators of health disparity.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the impact of community tele-paramedicine (CTP) on patient experience and satisfaction relative to community-level indicators of health disparity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This mixed-methods study evaluates patient-reported satisfaction and experience with CTP, a facilitated telehealth program combining in-home paramedic visits with video visits by emergency physicians. Anonymous post-CTP visit survey responses and themes derived from directed content analysis of in-depth interviews from participants of a randomized clinical trial of mobile integrated health and telehealth were stratified into high, moderate, and low health disparity Community Health Districts (CHD) according to the 2018 New York City (NYC) Community Health Survey. RESULTS: Among 232 CTP patients, 55% resided in high or moderate disparity CHDs but accounted for 66% of visits between April 2019 and October 2021. CHDs with the highest proportion of CTP visits were more adversely impacted by social determinants of health relative to the NYC average. Satisfaction surveys were completed in 37% of 2078 CTP visits between February 2021 and March 2023 demonstrating high patient satisfaction that did not vary by community-level health disparity. Qualitative interviews conducted with 19 patients identified differing perspectives on the value of CTP: patients in high-disparity CHDs expressed themes aligned with improved health literacy, self-efficacy, and a more engaged health system, whereas those from low-disparity CHDs focused on convenience and uniquely identified redundancies in at-home services. CONCLUSIONS: This mixed-methods analysis suggests CTP bridges the digital health divide by facilitating telehealth in communities negatively impacted by health disparities.

Mobile Integrated Health Interventions for Older Adults: A Systematic Review.

Background and Objectives: Mobile integrated health (MIH) interventions have not been well described in older adult populations. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the characteristics and effectiveness of MIH programs on health-related outcomes among older adults. Research Design and Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, AgeLine, Social Work Abstracts, and The Cochrane Library through June 2021 for randomized controlled trials or cohort studies evaluating MIH among adults aged 65 and older in the general community. Studies were screened for eligibility against predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Using at least 2 independent reviewers, quality was appraised using the Downs and Black checklist and study characteristics and findings were synthesized and evaluated for potential bias. Results: Screening of 2,160 records identified 15 studies. The mean age of participants was 67 years. The MIH interventions varied in their focus, community paramedic training, types of assessments and interventions delivered, physician oversight, use of telemedicine, and post-visit follow-up. Studies reported significant reductions in emergency call volume (5 studies) and immediate emergency department (ED) transports (3 studies). The 3 studies examining subsequent ED visits and 4 studies examining readmission rates reported mixed results. Studies reported low adverse event rates (5 studies), high patient and provider satisfaction (5 studies), and costs equivalent to or less than usual paramedic care (3 studies). Discussion and Implications: There is wide variability in MIH provider training, program coordination, and quality-based metrics, creating heterogeneity that make definitive conclusions challenging. Nonetheless, studies suggest MIH reduces emergency call volume and ED transport rates while improving patient experience and reducing overall health care costs.

Using Mobile Integrated Health and telehealth to support transitions of care among patients with heart failure (MIGHTy-Heart): protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Nearly one-quarter of patients discharged from the hospital with heart failure (HF) are readmitted within 30 days, placing a significant burden on patients, families and health systems. The objective of the 'Using Mobile Integrated Health and Telehealth to support transitions of care among patients with Heart failure' (MIGHTy-Heart) study is to compare the effectiveness of two postdischarge interventions on healthcare utilisation, patient-reported outcomes and healthcare quality among patients with HF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The MIGHTy-Heart study is a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial comparing two interventions demonstrated to improve the hospital to home transition for patients with HF: mobile integrated health (MIH) and transitions of care coordinators (TOCC). The MIH intervention bundles home visits from a community paramedic (CP) with telehealth video visits by emergency medicine physicians to support the management of acute symptoms and postdischarge care coordination. The TOCC intervention consists of follow-up phone calls from a registered nurse within 48-72 hours of discharge to assess a patient's clinical status, identify unmet clinical and social needs and reinforce patient education (eg, medication adherence and lifestyle changes). MIGHTy-Heart is enrolling and randomising (1:1) 2100 patients with HF who are discharged to home following a hospitalisation in two New York City (NY, USA) academic health systems. The coprimary study outcomes are all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions and quality of life measured with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire 30 days after hospital discharge. The secondary endpoints are days at home, preventable emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions and patient-reported symptoms. Data sources for the study outcomes include patient surveys, electronic health records and claims submitted to Medicare and Medicaid. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All participants provide written or verbal informed consent prior to randomisation in English, Spanish, French, Mandarin or Russian. Study findings are being disseminated to scientific audiences through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences. This study has been approved by: Biomedical Research Alliance of New York (BRANY #20-08-329-380), Weill Cornell Medicine Institutional Review Board (20-08022605) and Mt. Sinai Institutional Review Board (20-01901). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04662541.

The Effectiveness of Standardized Handoff Tool Interventions During Inter- and Intra-facility Care Transitions on Patient-Related Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Improving physician handoffs is a patient safety priority. The authors hypothesize that standardized handoff interventions during care transitions improve patient-related outcome measures. PubMed, Cochrane, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for publications from 2000 to May 2016. Eligible studies compared standardized handoff intervention(s) with no standardized handoff intervention and measured patient-related outcomes. Studies were evaluated independently for eligibility for inclusion by at least 2 authors in a 2-stage process; 14 articles met inclusion criteria. Only 1 study examined inter-facility transfers. Five categories of patient-related outcomes were identified: clinical complications, length of stay, processes of care, adverse events and errors, and family satisfaction. Interventions consistently improved processes of care; interventions consistently did not affect mortality. The other outcomes demonstrated mixed results. Inconsistent results, heterogeneity of the outcome measures, and limited quality studies limit the ability to draw definitive conclusions about best practices for standardized handoffs during care transitions.

Comparative Effectiveness Research: Alternatives to "Traditional" Computed Tomography Use in the Acute Care Setting.

Computed tomography (CT) scanning is an essential diagnostic tool and has revolutionized care of patients in the acute care setting. However, there is widespread agreement that overutilization of CT, where benefits do not exceed possible costs or harms, is occurring. The goal was to seek consensus in identifying and prioritizing research questions and themes that involve the comparative effectiveness of "traditional" CT use versus alternative diagnostic strategies in the acute care setting. A modified Delphi technique was used that included input from emergency physicians, emergency radiologists, medical physicists, and an industry expert to achieve this.

Derivation and validation of a clinical prediction rule for uncomplicated ureteral stone--the STONE score: retrospective and prospective observational cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE: To derive and validate an objective clinical prediction rule for the presence of uncomplicated ureteral stones in patients eligible for computed tomography (CT). We hypothesized that patients with a high probability of ureteral stones would have a low probability of acutely important alternative findings. DESIGN: Retrospective observational derivation cohort; prospective observational validation cohort. SETTING: Urban tertiary care emergency department and suburban freestanding community emergency department. PARTICIPANTS: Adults undergoing non-contrast CT for suspected uncomplicated kidney stone. The derivation cohort comprised a random selection of patients undergoing CT between April 2005 and November 2010 (1040 patients); the validation cohort included consecutive prospectively enrolled patients from May 2011 to January 2013 (491 patients). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In the derivation phase a priori factors potentially related to symptomatic ureteral stone were derived from the medical record blinded to the dictated CT report, which was separately categorized by diagnosis. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the top five factors associated with ureteral stone and these were assigned integer points to create a scoring system that was stratified into low, moderate, and high probability of ureteral stone. In the prospective phase this score was observationally derived blinded to CT results and compared with the prevalence of ureteral stone and important alternative causes of symptoms. RESULTS: The derivation sample included 1040 records, with five factors found to be most predictive of ureteral stone: male sex, short duration of pain, non-black race, presence of nausea or vomiting, and microscopic hematuria, yielding a score of 0-13 (the STONE score). Prospective validation was performed on 491 participants. In the derivation and validation cohorts ureteral stone was present in, respectively, 8.3% and 9.2% of the low probability (score 0-5) group, 51.6% and 51.3% of the moderate probability (score 6-9) group, and 89.6% and 88.6% of the high probability (score 10-13) group. In the high score group, acutely important alternative findings were present in 0.3% of the derivation cohort and 1.6% of the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The STONE score reliably predicts the presence of uncomplicated ureteral stone and lower likelihood of acutely important alternative findings. Incorporation in future investigations may help to limit exposure to radiation and over-utilization of imaging. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01352676.

Prevalence and clinical importance of alternative causes of symptoms using a renal colic computed tomography protocol in patients with flank or back pain and absence of pyuria.

OBJECTIVES: The study was undertaken to determine the prevalence and clinical importance of alternative causes of symptoms discovered in patients undergoing flank pain protocol (FPP) computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with classic symptoms of kidney stone (flank pain, back pain, or both) without evidence of urine infection. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational analysis of all adult patients undergoing FPP CT scans at two emergency departments (EDs) between April 2005 and November 2010. All CTs (N = 5,383) were reviewed and categorized as "no cause of symptoms seen on CT," "ureteral stone as cause of symptoms," or "non-kidney stone cause of symptoms." Non-kidney stone scans were further categorized as "acutely important," "follow-up recommended," or "unimportant cause," based on a priori diagnostic classifications. All nonstone causes of pain and a random subset of subjects (n = 1,843; 34%) underwent full record review blinded to CT categorization to determine demographics, whether flank and/or back pain was present, and whether there was objective evidence of pyuria. RESULTS: Of all FPP CT scans during the study period, a ureteral stone was found to cause symptoms in 47.7% of CTs, with no cause of symptoms found in 43.3% of CTs. A non-kidney stone diagnosis was found in 9.0% of all CTs, with 6.1% being categorized as "acutely important," 2.2% as "follow-up recommended," and 0.65% with symptoms from an "unimportant cause." In the randomly selected subset undergoing full record review, categorizations were similar, with 49.0% of CTs showing kidney stone as cause of pain and 9.0% a non-kidney stone cause (5.9% "acutely important"). When subjects with evidence of urine infection or without flank or back pain were excluded, ureteral stone was identified as the cause of pain in 54.9% of CTs, while non-kidney stone cause of symptoms was found in 5.4% of scans and acutely important alternate causes in 2.8% of scans. CONCLUSIONS: While a non-kidney stone cause for a patient's symptoms are found in nearly 10% of CTs done using a FPP, acutely important findings occur in less than 3% of scans done in patients with flank or back pain and absence of pyuria.

Community-based assessment of human rights in a complex humanitarian emergency: the Emergency Assistance Teams-Burma and Cyclone Nargis.

INTRODUCTION: Cyclone Nargis hit Burma on May 2, 2008, killing over 138,000 and affecting at least 2.4 million people. The Burmese military junta, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), initially blocked international aid to storm victims, forcing community-based organizations such as the Emergency Assistance Teams-Burma (EAT) to fill the void, helping with cyclone relief and long-term reconstruction. Recognizing the need for independent monitoring of the human rights situation in cyclone-affected areas, particularly given censorship over storm relief coverage, EAT initiated such documentation efforts. METHODS: A human rights investigation was conducted to document selected human rights abuses that had initially been reported to volunteers providing relief services in cyclone affected areas. Using participatory research methods and qualitative, semi-structured interviews, EAT volunteers collected 103 testimonies from August 2008 to June 2009; 42 from relief workers and 61 from storm survivors. RESULTS: One year after the storm, basic necessities such as food, potable water, and shelter remained insufficient for many, a situation exacerbated by lack of support to help rebuild livelihoods and worsening household debt. This precluded many survivors from being able to access healthcare services, which were inadequate even before Cyclone Nargis. Aid efforts continued to be met with government restrictions and harassment, and relief workers continued to face threats and fear of arrest. Abuses, including land confiscation and misappropriation of aid, were reported during reconstruction, and tight government control over communication and information exchange continued. CONCLUSIONS: Basic needs of many cyclone survivors in the Irrawaddy Delta remained unmet over a year following Cyclone Nargis. Official impediments to delivery of aid to storm survivors continued, including human rights abrogations experienced by civilians during reconstruction efforts. Such issues remain unaddressed in official assessments conducted in partnership with the SPDC. Private, community-based relief organizations like EAT are well positioned and able to independently assess human rights conditions in response to complex humanitarian emergencies such as Cyclone Nargis; efforts of this nature must be encouraged, particularly in settings where human rights abuses have been documented and censorship is widespread.

Predictors of antiretroviral treatment failure in an urban HIV clinic.

BACKGROUND: Predictors of antiretroviral treatment (ART) failure are not well characterized for heterogeneous clinic populations. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of HIV-infected patients followed in an urban HIV clinic with an HIV RNA measurement < or =400 copies/mL on ART between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2004. The primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as virologic failure (> or =1 HIV RNA measurement >400 copies/mL), unsanctioned stopping of ART, or loss to follow-up. Prior ART adherence and other baseline patient characteristics, determined at the time of the first suppressed HIV RNA load on or after January 1, 2003, were extracted from the electronic health record (EHR). Predictors of failure were assessed using proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Of 829 patients in the clinic, 614 had at least 1 HIV RNA measurement < or =400 copies/mL during the study period. Of these, 167 (27.2%) experienced treatment failure. Baseline characteristics associated with treatment failure in the multivariate model were: poor adherence (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.34 to 5.05), absolute neutrophil count <1000/mm (HR = 2.90, 95% CI: 1.26 to 6.69), not suppressed on January 1, 2003 (HR = 2.69, 95% CI: 1.78 to 4.07) or <12 months of suppression (HR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.10 to 2.45), CD4 count <200 cells/mm (HR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.76), nucleoside-only regimen (HR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.08 to 2.82), prior virologic failure (HR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.22 to 2.39) and > or =1 missed visit in the prior year (HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.13 to 2.16). CONCLUSIONS: More than one quarter of patients in a heterogeneous clinic population had treatment failure over a 2-year period. Prior ART adherence and other EHR data readily identify patient characteristics that could trigger specific interventions to improve ART outcomes.