A national census for the off-label treatment of complex aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Despite regulatory challenges, device availability, and rapidly expanding techniques, off-label endovascular repair of complex aortic aneurysms (cAAs) has expanded in the past decade. Given the lack of United States Food and Drug Administration-approved endovascular technology to treat cAAs, we performed a national census to better understand volume and current practice patterns in the United States. METHODS: Targeted sampling identified vascular surgeons with experience in off-label endovascular repair of cAAs. An electronic survey was distributed with institutional review board approval from the University of Rochester to 261 individuals with a response rate of 38% (n = 98). RESULTS: A total of 93 respondents (95%) reported off-label endovascular repair of cAAs. Mean age was 45.7 ± 8.3 years, and 84% were male. Most respondents (59%) were within the first 10 years of practice, and 69% trained at institutions with a high-volume of off-label endovascular procedures for complex aortic aneurysms with or without a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption (PS-IDE). Twelve respondents from 11 institutions reported institutional PS-IDEs for physician-modified endografts (PMEGs), in-situ laser fenestration (ISLF), or parallel grafting technique (PGT), including sites with PS-IDEs for custom-manufactured devices. Eighty-nine unique institutions reported elective off-label endovascular repair with a mean of 20.2 ± 16.5 cases/year and ∼1757 total cases/year nationally. Eighty reported urgent/emergent off-label endovascular repair with a mean of 5.7 ± 5.4 cases/year and ∼499 total cases/year nationally. There was no correlation between high-volume endovascular institutions (>15 cases/year) and institutions with high volumes of open surgical repair for cAAs (>15 cases/year; odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-1.5; P = .34). Elective techniques included PMEG (70%), ISLF (30%), hybrid PMEG/ISLF (18%), and PGT (14%), with PMEG being the preferred technique for 63% of respondents. Techniques for emergent endovascular treatment of complex aortic disease included PMEG (52%), ISLF (40%), PGT (20%), and hybrid-PMEG/ISLF (14%), with PMEG being the preferred technique for 41% of respondents. Thirty-nine percent of respondents always or frequently offer referrals to institutions with PS-IDEs for custom-manufactured devices. The most common barrier for referral to PS-IDE centers included geographic distance (48%), longitudinal relationship with patient (45%), and costs associated with travel (33%). Only 61% of respondents participate in the Vascular Quality Initiative for complex endovascular aneurysm repair, and only 57% maintain a prospective institutional database. Eighty-six percent reported interest in a national collaborative database for off-label endovascular repair of cAA. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of off-label endovascular repair of cAAs are likely underrepresented in the literature based on this national census. PMEG was the most common technique for elective and emergent procedures. Under-reported off-label endovascular repair of cAA outcomes data appears to be limited by non-standardized PS-IDE reporting to the United States Food and Drug Administration, and the lack of Vascular Quality Initiative participation and prospective institutional data collection. Most participants are interested in a national collaborative database for endovascular repair of cAAs.

Trends in HCAHPS Survey Scores, 2008-2019: A Quality Improvement Perspective.

BACKGROUND: HCAHPS' 2008 initial public reporting, 2012 inclusion in the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program (HVBP), and 2015 inclusion in Hospital Star Ratings were intended to improve patient experiences. OBJECTIVES: Characterize pre-COVID-19 (2008-2019) trends in hospital consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems (HCAHPS) scores. RESEARCH DESIGN: Describe HCAHPS score trends overall, by phase: (1) initial public reporting period (2008-2013), (2) first 2 years of HVBP (2013-2015), and (3) initial HCAHPS Star Ratings reporting (2015-2019); and by hospital characteristics (HCAHPS decile, ownership, size, teaching affiliation, and urban/rural). SUBJECTS: A total of 3909 HCAHPS-participating US hospitals. MEASURES: HCAHPS summary score (HCAHPS-SS) and 9 measures. RESULTS: The mean 2007-2019 HCAHPS-SS improvement in most-positive-category ("top-box") responses was +5.2 percentage points/pp across all hospitals (where differences of 5pp, 3pp, and 1pp are "large," "medium," and "small"). Improvement rate was largest in phase 1 (+0.8/pp/year vs. +0.2pp/year and +0.1pp/year for phases 2 and 3, respectively). Improvement was largest for Overall Rating of Hospital (+8.5pp), Discharge Information (+7.3pp), and Nurse Communication (+6.5pp), smallest for Doctor Communication (+0.8pp). Some measures improved notably through phases 2 and 3 (Nurse Communication, Staff Responsiveness, Overall Rating of Hospital), but others slowed or reversed in Phase 3 (Communication about Medicines, Quietness). Bottom-decile hospitals improved more than other hospitals for all measures. CONCLUSIONS: All HCAHPS measures improved rapidly 2008-2013, especially among low-performing (bottom-decile) hospitals, narrowing the range of performance and improving scores overall. This initial improvement may reflect widespread, general quality improvement (QI) efforts in lower-performing hospitals. Subsequent slower improvement following the introduction of HVBP and Star Ratings may have reflected targeted, resource-intensive QI in higher-performing hospitals.

Measuring Access to Mental Health Services Among Primary Care Patients.

BACKGROUND: The lifetime risk of mental health disorders is almost 50% and, in any year, about 25% of the population have a psychiatric disorder. Many of those people are cared for in primary care settings. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Measure access to mental health services, such as getting counselling or prescription mental health medications, using new patient survey questions that can be added to Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) surveys. STUDY DESIGN: Surveys were conducted with a stratified probability sample of patients receiving primary care services in a single state in 2018-2019. Medicaid and privately insured patients were surveyed by mail or telephone, respectively. RESULTS: Approximately 14% of sampled patients responded to a survey. More than 10% of privately insured respondents and about 20% of Medicaid respondents got or tried to get appointments for mental health care. About 15% of privately insured respondents and 11% of Medicaid respondents reported problems getting appointments with counselors. Only 8%-9% of respondents seeking mental health medicines reported problems getting appointments for prescriptions. A composite measure combining access to counselors and prescribers of mental health medicines evidenced adequate internal consistency reliability. Group level reliability estimates were low. CONCLUSIONS: Many respondents got or tried to get mental health services and a substantial number reported problems getting appointments or getting mental health prescriptions. The tested questions can be combined into an Access to Mental Health Care measure, which can be included in patient experience surveys for ambulatory care to monitor access to behavioral health care.

HIV testing at visits to US emergency departments: 2021 update.

In this updated cross-sectional analysis of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, we found that among the 2.5 million more weighted emergency department (ED) visits in 2021 compared with 2020, there was an insignificant increase in HIV testing per ED visit in 2021 compared with 2020 (0.81% to 0.86%). This suggests HIV testing during ED visits did not increase in line with rebounding visit volumes after the pandemic nadir.

Multidisciplinary survey on use of feeding tubes in head and neck cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy in Germany-the SUFEETUBE project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Data on enteral tube feeding in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy vary considerably between German institutions. This survey aims to investigate the management of feeding tubes in an interdisciplinary context across Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between December 2022 and May 2023, 70 participants (42 radiation oncologists, 12 medical oncologists, 14 head and neck surgeons, and 2 physicians covering several specialties) responded to our web-based survey. In addition to the type of institution (university hospital, private practice, etc.), their age, and professional experience (in years), participants were asked several questions on the indication and institutional policy for tube placement and management (prophylactic/reactive nasogastric or gastrostomy tube). All questions were mandatory single- or multiple-choice questions, while additional comments were possible by email. RESULTS: Most participants were employed at a university hospital (n = 52; 74.3%) and came from a radiation oncology background (n = 42; 60%). Fifty-four contributors (77.1%) reported that no nutritional risk screening prior to chemoradiotherapy was routinely performed, and 71.4% (n = 50) stated that no standardized protocol was used at the institution to set the indication for tube placement. Generally, policies and methods of tube feeding vary considerably between the individual institutions and specialties. However, the majority (n = 56, 80%) recommended a prophylactic percutaneous enteral gastrostomy (PEG) tube to their patients before chemoradiotherapy. Still, there was no consistent trend regarding the approach for reactive tube feeding. CONCLUSION: The policies and methods of tube feeding vary considerably between the individual institutions and specialties in Germany. In the era of individualized medicine, uniform protocols are difficult to establish. However, a baseline nutritional risk screening could simplify decision-making in clinical practice.

Prevalence of Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing with or without a Plausible Antibiotic Indication among Safety-Net and Non-Safety Net Populations.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians can prescribe antibiotics inappropriately without coding the indication for antibiotics. Whether the prevalence of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with or without a plausible indication differs between safety-net and non-safety-net populations is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with or without a plausible indication between safety-net and non-safety net populations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: Office visits in the 2016, 2018, 2019 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey with ≥ 1 antibiotic prescription among children (0-17 years) and adults (18-64 years). MAIN MEASURES: Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with a plausible indication (visits with infection-related diagnosis codes that do not warrant antibiotics, e.g., acute bronchitis); inappropriate prescribing without a plausible indication (visits with codes that are not antibiotic indications, e.g., hypertension). By age group, we used linear regression to assess differences between safety-net (public/no insurance) and non-safety net populations (privately insured), controlling for patient and visit characteristics. KEY RESULTS: Analyses included 67,065,108 and 122,731,809 weighted visits for children and adults, respectively. Among visits for children in the safety-net and non-safety populations, the prevalence of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with a plausible indication was 11.7% and 22.0% (adjusted difference: -8.0%, 95% CI: -17.1%, 1.0%); the prevalence of inappropriate prescribing without a plausible indication was 11.8% and 8.6% (adjusted difference: -2.0%, 95% CI: -4.6%, 0.6%). Among visits for adults in the safety-net and non-safety populations, the prevalence of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with a plausible indication was 12.1% and 14.3% (adjusted difference: -0.1%, 95% CI -9.4%, 9.1%); the prevalence of inappropriate prescribing without a plausible indication was 48.2% and 32.3% (adjusted difference: 12.5%, 95% CI: 3.6%, 21.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing with or without a plausible antibiotic indication is common in all populations, highlighting the importance of broad-based antibiotic stewardship initiatives. However, targeted initiatives focused on improving coding quality in adult safety-net settings may be warranted.

Vital Signs: Trends and Disparities in Childhood Vaccination Coverage by Vaccines for Children Program Eligibility - National Immunization Survey-Child, United States, 2012-2022.

Introduction: The Vaccines for Children (VFC) program was established in 1994 to provide recommended vaccines at no cost to eligible children and help ensure that all U.S. children are protected from life-threatening vaccine-preventable diseases. Methods: CDC analyzed data from the 2012-2022 National Immunization Survey-Child (NIS-Child) to assess trends in vaccination coverage with ≥1 dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR), 2-3 doses of rotavirus vaccine, and a combined 7-vaccine series, by VFC program eligibility status, and to examine differences in coverage among VFC-eligible children by sociodemographic characteristics. VFC eligibility was defined as meeting at least one of the following criteria: 1) American Indian or Alaska Native; 2) insured by Medicaid, Indian Health Service (IHS), or uninsured; or 3) ever received at least one vaccination at an IHS-operated center, Tribal health center, or urban Indian health care facility. Results: Overall, approximately 52.2% of U.S. children were VFC eligible. Among VFC-eligible children born during 2011-2020, coverage by age 24 months was stable for ≥1 MMR dose (88.0%-89.9%) and the combined 7-vaccine series (61.4%-65.3%). Rotavirus vaccination coverage by age 8 months was 64.8%-71.1%, increasing by an average of 0.7 percentage points annually. Among all children born in 2020, coverage was 3.8 (≥1 MMR dose), 11.5 (2-3 doses of rotavirus vaccine), and 13.8 (combined 7-vaccine series) percentage points lower among VFC-eligible than among non-VFC-eligible children. Conclusions and implications for public health practice: Although the VFC program has played a vital role in increasing and maintaining high levels of childhood vaccination coverage for 30 years, gaps remain. Enhanced efforts must ensure that parents and guardians of VFC-eligible children are aware of, have confidence in, and are able to obtain all recommended vaccines for their children.

National Vaccination Coverage Among Adolescents Aged 13-17 Years - National Immunization Survey-Teen, United States, 2023.

Based on safety and efficacy data, vaccinations are the best defense to protect persons and communities from serious vaccine-preventable diseases. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends routine vaccination of adolescents aged 11-12 years with three vaccines including tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine; quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine; and human papillomavirus vaccine. CDC analyzed data from the 2023 National Immunization Survey-Teen for 16,658 adolescents aged 13-17 years (born during January 2005-December 2010) to assess vaccination coverage in 2023, recent trends in coverage by birth year, and trends in coverage by eligibility for the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program and birth year. In 2023, coverage with all routine vaccines recommended for adolescents was similar to coverage in 2022. Vaccination coverage among VFC-eligible adolescents was generally stable during the COVID-19 pandemic, except for a decrease in the percentage of VFC-eligible adolescents who were up to date with HPV vaccination by age 13 years among those born in 2010 compared with those born in 2007. Whereas coverage differences were found between VFC-eligible and non-VFC-eligible adolescents before the COVID-19 pandemic, coverage was similar among the most recent birth years in the survey. Providers should make strong recommendations for all routine vaccines and review adolescent vaccination records to verify if adolescents are up to date with all recommended vaccines.

Surveillance After Surgical and Endovascular Treatment for Peripheral Artery Disease: a Dutch Survey.

OBJECTIVE: At present, there is no clear, optimal approach to surveillance after invasive treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in terms of modality, duration, clinical benefit, and cost effectiveness. The ongoing debate on the clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of standard surveillance creates a clear knowledge gap and may result in overtreatment or undertreatment. In this study, a survey was conducted among vascular surgeons in the Netherlands to assess the currently applied surveillance programmes. METHODS: All vascular surgeons from the Dutch Society for Vascular Surgery received an online survey on follow up after open and endovascular revascularisation in patients with PAD. Surveillance was defined as at least one follow up visit after intervention with or without additional imaging or ankle brachial index (ABI) measurement. Ten types of PAD intervention were surveyed. RESULTS: Surveys were returned by 97 (46.2%) of 210 vascular surgeons, and 76% reported using a routine follow up protocol after an invasive intervention. Clinical follow up only is most commonly performed after femoral endarterectomy (53%). After peripheral bypass surgery, clinical follow up only is applied rarely (4 - 8%). In six of the 10 interventions surveyed, duplex ultrasound (DUS) was the most used imaging modality for follow up. After bypass surgery, 76 - 86% of vascular surgeons perform DUS with or without ABI measurement. After endovascular interventions, 21 - 60% performed DUS surveillance. Lifelong surveillance is most often applied after aortobifemoral bypass (57%). Surveillance frequency and duration vary greatly within the same intervention. Frequencies range from every three or six months to annually. Duration ranges from one time surveillance to lifelong follow up. CONCLUSION: There is significant practice variation in surveillance after surgical and endovascular treatment of patients with PAD in the Netherlands. Prospective studies to evaluate treatment outcomes and to define the clinical need and cost effectiveness of standardised surveillance programmes for patients with PAD are recommended.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation and its implications for modern cardiac electrophysiology: results of an EHRA survey.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) is a treatment option for recurrent ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) in patients with structural heart disease (SHD). The current and future role of STAR as viewed by cardiologists is unknown. The study aimed to assess the current role, barriers to application, and expected future role of STAR. An online survey consisting of 20 questions on baseline demographics, awareness/access, current use, and the future role of STAR was conducted. A total of 129 international participants completed the survey [mean age 43 ± 11 years, 25 (16.4%) female]. Ninety-one (59.9%) participants were electrophysiologists. Nine participants (7%) were unaware of STAR as a therapeutic option. Sixty-four (49.6%) had access to STAR, while 62 (48.1%) had treated/referred a patient for treatment. Common primary indications for STAR were recurrent VT/VF in SHD (45%), recurrent VT/VF without SHD (7.8%), or premature ventricular contraction (3.9%). Reported main advantages of STAR were efficacy in the treatment of arrhythmias not amenable to conventional treatment (49%) and non-invasive treatment approach with overall low expected acute and short-term procedural risk (23%). Most respondents have foreseen a future clinical role of STAR in the treatment of VT/VF with or without underlying SHD (72% and 75%, respectively), although only a minority expected a first-line indication for it (7% and 5%, respectively). Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation as a novel treatment option of recurrent VT appears to gain acceptance within the cardiology community. Further trials are critical to further define efficacy, patient populations, as well as the appropriate clinical use for the treatment of VT.

Definition and management of arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy: findings from the European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

AIMS: Arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AiCM) represents a subtype of acute heart failure (HF) in the context of sustained arrhythmia. Clear definitions and management recommendations for AiCM are lacking. The European Heart Rhythm Association Scientific Initiatives Committee (EHRA SIC) conducted a survey to explore the current definitions and management of patients with AiCM among European and non-European electrophysiologists. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 25-item online questionnaire was developed and distributed among EP specialists on the EHRA SIC website and on social media between 4 September and 5 October 2023. Of the 206 respondents, 16% were female and 61% were between 30 and 49 years old. Most of the respondents were EP specialists (81%) working at university hospitals (47%). While most participants (67%) agreed that AiCM should be defined as a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) impairment after new onset of an arrhythmia, only 35% identified a specific LVEF drop to diagnose AiCM with a wide range of values (5-20% LVEF drop). Most respondents considered all available therapies: catheter ablation (93%), electrical cardioversion (83%), antiarrhythmic drugs (76%), and adjuvant HF treatment (76%). A total of 83% of respondents indicated that adjuvant HF treatment should be started at first HF diagnosis prior to antiarrhythmic treatment, and 84% agreed it should be stopped within six months after LVEF normalization. Responses for the optimal time point for the first LVEF reassessment during follow-up varied markedly (1 day-6 months after antiarrhythmic treatment). CONCLUSION: This EHRA Survey reveals varying practices regarding AiCM among physicians, highlighting a lack of consensus and heterogenous care of these patients.

Cardioneuroablation for vasovagal syncope: insights on patients' selection, centre settings, procedural workflow and endpoints-results from an European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

AIMS: Cardioneuroablation (CNA) is a catheter-based intervention for recurrent vasovagal syncope (VVS) that consists in the modulation of the parasympathetic cardiac autonomic nervous system. This survey aims to provide a comprehensive overview of current CNA utilization in Europe. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 202 participants from 40 different countries replied to the survey. Half of the respondents have performed a CNA during the last 12 months, reflecting that it is considered a treatment option of a subset of patients. Seventy-one per cent of respondents adopt an approach targeting ganglionated plexuses (GPs) systematically in both the right atrium (RA) and left atrium (LA). The second most common strategy (16%) involves LA GP ablation only after no response following RA ablation. The procedural endpoint is frequently an increase in heart rate. Ganglionated plexus localization predominantly relies on an anatomical approach (90%) and electrogram analysis (59%). Less utilized methods include pre-procedural imaging (20%), high-frequency stimulation (17%), and spectral analysis (10%). Post-CNA, anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy is prescribed, with only 11% of the respondents discharging patients without such medication. Cardioneuroablation is perceived as effective (80% of respondents) and safe (71% estimated <1% rate of procedure-related complications). Half view CNA emerging as a first-line therapy in the near future. CONCLUSION: This survey offers a snapshot of the current implementation of CNA in Europe. The results show high expectations for the future of CNA, but important heterogeneity exists regarding indications, procedural workflow, and endpoints of CNA. Ongoing efforts are essential to standardize procedural protocols and peri-procedural patient management.

Patterns of antibiotic administration in Chinese neonates: results from a multi-center, point prevalence survey.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, we describe the patterns of antibiotic prescription for neonates based on World Health Organization's (WHO) Essential Medicines List Access, Watch, and Reserve (AWaRe), and the Management of Antibiotic Classification (MAC) Guidelines in China. METHODS: One-day point-prevalence surveys (PPS) on antimicrobial prescriptions were conducted on behalf of hospitalized neonates in China from September 1 and November 30, annually from 2017 to 2019. RESULTS: Data was collected for a total of 2674 neonatal patients from 15 hospitals in 9 provinces across China of which 1520 were newborns who received at least one antibiotic agent. A total of 1943 antibiotic prescriptions were included in the analysis. The most commonly prescribed antibiotic was meropenem (11.8%). The most common reason for prescribing antibiotic to neonates was pneumonia (44.2%). There were 419 (21.6%), 1343 (69.1%) and 6 (0.3%) antibiotic prescriptions in the Access, Watch and Reserve groups, respectively. According to MAC Guidelines in China, there were 1090 (56.1%) antibiotic agents in the Restricted and 414 (21.3%) in the Special group. CONCLUSION: Broad-spectrum antibiotics included in the Watch and Special groups were likely to be overused in Chinese neonates.

Assessment of adherence to treatment recommendations among patients with heart failure: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a chronic condition characterized by significant impairment of the cardiovascular system, leading to a decline in health-related quality of life, recurrent hospitalizations, and increased mortality risk. It poses a substantial challenge for modern medicine, particularly when patients fail to adhere to therapeutic recommendations. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the level of adherence to therapeutic guidelines among patients with HF and identify factors influencing adherence levels. METHODS: The study comprised 105 HF patients admitted to the cardiology department. A diagnostic survey approach was utilized, employing the Adherence in Chronic Diseases Scale (ACDS) along with a self-developed questionnaire. RESULTS: The findings revealed that 39.05% of participants exhibited a moderate level of adherence to therapeutic recommendations, while 34.29% reported high adherence and 26.67% displayed low adherence. Most of the patients (n = 66) had a rather good level of knowledge. Factors such as higher education (p < 0.001), engagement in mental work (p = 0.001), favorable socioeconomic status (p < 0.001), being in a stable relationship (p < 0.001), and residing with family (p < 0.001) were associated with increased adherence levels. The multivariable linear regression model indicated significant (p < 0.05) independent predictors that positively influenced the ACDS score, including being in a relationship, widowhood, and average or poor financial situation. Conversely, factors such as obesity and respiratory diseases were associated with a decrease in the ACDS score (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the moderate adherence level to therapeutic recommendations among HF patients. Sociodemographic factors including education level, relationship status, occupation, financial stability, and living arrangements significantly impact adherence. Conversely, patients with obesity, respiratory conditions, or frequent HF-related hospitalizations demonstrate lower adherence. Patient education emerges as a pivotal factor influencing adherence. Tailored interventions targeting these factors could enhance adherence and optimize HF management outcomes.

Differences in provider approach to initiating and titrating guideline directed medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Despite the strong evidence supporting guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), prescription rates in clinical practice are still lacking. METHODS: A survey containing 20 clinical vignettes of patients with HFrEF was answered by a national sample of 127 cardiologists and 68 internal/family medicine physicians. Each vignette had 4-5 options for adjusting GDMT and the option to make no medication changes. Survey respondents could only select one option. For analysis, responses were dichotomized to the answer of interest. RESULTS: Cardiologists were more likely to make GDMT changes than general medicine physicians (91.8% vs. 82.0%; OR 1.84 [1.07-3.19]; p = 0.020). Cardiologists were more likely to initiate beta-blockers (46.3% vs. 32.0%; OR 2.38 [1.18-4.81], p = 0.016), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) (63.8% vs. 48.1%; OR 1.76 [1.01-3.09], p = 0.047), and hydralazine and isosorbide dinitrate (HYD/ISDN) (38.2% vs. 23.7%; OR 2.47 [1.48-4.12], p < 0.001) compared to general medicine physicians. No differences were found in initiating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEi/ARBs), initiating mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), sodium-glucose transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, digoxin, or ivabradine. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate cardiologists were more likely to adjust GDMT than general medicine physicians. Future focus on improving GDMT prescribing should target providers other than cardiologists to improve care in patients with HFrEF.

Pharmacological treatment of cancer pain and opioid induced nausea and vomiting: online survey and comparison with current guidelines.

PURPOSE: We assumed that in Palliative Care, even in common clinical situations, the choice of drugs differs substantially between physicians. Therefore, we assessed the practice of pharmaceutical treatment choices of physicians for cancer pain and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) and the rationale for their choices. METHODS: An online survey was conducted with physicians covering the following domains: i) Cancer pain therapy: non-opioids in addition to opioids: choice of drug ii) prevention of OINV: choice of drug and mode of application. Current guidelines concerning cancer pain therapy and prevention of OINV were compared. RESULTS: Two-hundred-forty European physicians responded to our survey. i) Use of non-opioids in addition to opioids for the treatment of cancer pain: Only 1.3% (n = 3) of respondents never used an additional non-opioid. Others mostly used: dipyrone/metamizole (49.2%, n = 118), paracetamol/acetaminophen (34.2%, n = 82), ibuprofen / other NSAIDs (11.3%, n = 27), specific Cox2-inhibitors (2.1%, n = 5), Aspirin (0.4%, n = 1), no answer (2.9%, n = 7). ii) Antiemetics to prevent OINV: The drugs of choice were metoclopramide (58.3%, n = 140), haloperidol (26.3%, n = 63), 5-HT3 antagonists (9.6%, n = 23), antihistamines (1.3%, n = 3) and other (2.9%, n = 7); no answer (1.7%, n = 4). Most respondents prescribed the substances on-demand (59.6%, n = 143) while others (36.3%, n = 87) provided them as around the clock medication. Over both domains, most physicians answered that their choices were not based on solid evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Guidelines were inconsistent regarding if and what non-opioid to use for cancer pain and recommend anti-dopaminergic drugs for prevention or treatment of OINV. CONCLUSIONS: Physician's practice in palliative care for the treatment of cancer pain and OINV differed substantially. Respondents expressed the lack of high-quality evidence- based information from RCTs. We call for evidence from methodologically high-quality RCTs to be available to inform physicians about the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatments for common symptoms in palliative care.

Statewide Survey of Primary Care and Subspecialty Providers on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk-Stratification and Surveillance Practices.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance in patients with cirrhosis is associated with improved survival. Provision of HCC surveillance is low in the US, particularly in primary care settings. AIMS: To evaluate current hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HCC surveillance practices and physician attitudes regarding HCC risk-stratification among primary care and subspecialty providers. METHODS: Using the Tailored Design Method, we delivered a 34-item online survey to 7654 North Carolina-licensed internal/family medicine or gastroenterology/hepatology physicians and advanced practice providers in 2022. We included the domains of HCV treatment, cirrhosis diagnosis, HCC surveillance practices, barriers to surveillance, and interest in risk-stratification tools. We performed descriptive analyses to summarize responses. Tabulations were weighted based on sampling weights accounting for non-response and inter-specialty comparisons were made using chi-squared or t test statistics. RESULTS: After exclusions, 266 responses were included in the final sample (response rate 3.8%). Most respondents (78%) diagnosed cirrhosis using imaging and a minority used non-invasive tests that were blood-based (~ 15%) or transient elastography (31%). Compared to primary care providers, subspecialists were more likely to perform HCC surveillance every 6-months (vs annual) (98% vs 35%, p < 0.0001). Most respondents (80%) believed there were strong data to support HCC surveillance, but primary care providers did not know which liver disease patients needed surveillance. Most providers (> 70%) expressed interest in potential solutions to improve HCC risk-stratification. CONCLUSIONS: In this statewide survey, there were great knowledge gaps in HCC surveillance among PCPs and most respondents expressed interest in strategies to increase appropriate HCC surveillance.

The Global Anesthesia Workforce Survey: Updates and Trends in the Anesthesia Workforce.

BACKGROUND: There is a large global deficit of anesthesia providers. In 2016, the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) conducted a survey to count the number of anesthesia providers worldwide. Much work has taken place since then to strengthen the anesthesia health workforce. This study updates the global count of anesthesia providers. METHODS: Between 2021 and 2023, an electronic survey was sent to national professional societies of physician anesthesia providers (PAPs), nurse anesthetists, and other nonphysician anesthesia providers (NPAPs). Data included number of providers and trainees, proportion of females, and limited intensive care unit (ICU) capacity data. Descriptive statistics were calculated by country, World Bank income group, and World Health Organization (WHO) region. Provider density is reported as the number of providers per 100,000 population. RESULTS: Responses were obtained for 172 of 193 United Nations (UN) member countries. The global provider density was 8.8 (PAP 6.6 NPAP 2.3). Seventy-six countries had a PAP density <5, whereas 66 countries had a total provider density <5. PAP density increased everywhere except for high- and low-income countries and the African region. CONCLUSIONS: The overall size of the global anesthesia workforce has increased over time, although some countries have experienced a decrease. Population growth and differences in which provider types that are counted can have an important impact on provider density. More work is needed to define appropriate metrics for measuring changes in density, to describe anesthesia cadres, and to improve workforce data collection processes. Effort to scale up anesthesia provider training must urgently continue.

Evaluating the Frequency of Mole Checks by a Dermatologist and Correlated Variables in a Global Survey across 17 Countries: HELIOS Project.

Secondary prevention of skin cancer consists in early detection of malignant lesions through patients' mole self-examination and medical examination. The objective of this study was to assess the self-reported  frequency of mole examination in a large, representative sample of the adult general population of 17 countries from all continents. Of a total of 17,001 participants, 4.8% had their moles checked by a dermatologist more than once a year, 11.3% once a year, 8.4% every 2-3 years, 12.4% once in a while, 10.3% once in lifetime, and 52.6% of participants had never performed a mole examination. Egypt was the country with the highest prevalence of people who performed a moles check more than once a year (15.9%), followed by Brazil and the USA. A higher frequency of mole checks was associated with sex (man vs woman), higher education, higher income, fair phototype, history of skin cancer, medical insurance, and sun-protective behaviours. Despite recommendations by health providers, it appears that the frequency of mole checks in the general population is still low. It is necessary for dermatologists to keep informing at-risk populations about the importance of moles check, with particular care regarding categories that less frequently adhere to secondary prevention measures.

Devices for securing and administering pediatric compounded oral liquids: survey results from French university hospitals.

Oral liquid forms, either commercial or compounded, are preferred in pediatrics due to their suitability for weight-based dosing and acceptability for children. The choice of dosing delivery devices associated with oral liquid forms is important to ensure accurate dosing, ease of administration, and patient safety. Given the prevalence of compounding in pediatric settings, this study aimed to investigate the practices among French university hospitals concerning the selection of dosing delivery devices associated with compounding oral liquid forms for children. An online survey was distributed to pharmacists involved in compounding in French university hospitals. The survey covered aspects such as the presence of child-resistant caps, types of dosing devices, the presence of bottle adapters, and the type of bottle adapters used. Among the 36 hospital pharmacies contacted, 24 responded to the survey. One pharmacy employed child-resistant caps for compounded liquid forms. Enteral syringes emerged as the primary dosing device (71%), with a minority using luer/luer-lock syringes (21%). Spoon and measuring cup usage was reported by none. Approximately two-thirds of the pharmacies (67%) used a bottle adapter in conjunction with the sampling device.   Conclusion: The study highlighted diversity in the practices of French university hospitals regarding dosing delivery devices associated with compounding oral liquid forms for pediatric patients. The findings underscored the need for standardized guidelines to streamline practices and enhance safety and precision in compounded medication administration for children. What is Known: • Administration devices are important to ensure the correct administration of the required dose of oral liquids in pediatrics. • For compounded oral liquid forms, the selection and supply of administration devices are managed by compounding pharmacies from those available on the market. What is New: • The study highlighted the variability of administration devices associated with compounded liquids for oral use in French hospital pharmacies.