RheumMadness Over Two Years: Engaging Participants in Active Learning and Connecting Early Trainees to the Rheumatology Community.

OBJECTIVE: RheumMadness is an online learning collaborative that seeks to actively engage the rheumatology community. The objective of this manuscript is to analyze the educational experience of RheumMadness over two years. METHODS: Direct measures of participant engagement were obtained using web-based analytics. An electronic survey was created after the tournament to capture self-reported engagement and educational experience using the Community of Inquiry framework. Data were analyzed according to the following objectives: (1) compare demographics, engagement, and educational experience of participants between 2021 and 2022; (2) describe the educational experience of those who created scouting reports; (3) explore the impact of RheumMadness on early learners (medical students and residents). RESULTS: Compared with 2021, the 2022 tournament had more participants who submitted a bracket, more early learners, and more scouting report creators. Self-reported engagement and educational experience was high in both years of the tournament among all participants. Over 85% of scouting report creators reported that making a report was a fun and valuable learning experience. Early learners reported significantly higher levels of knowledge integration, sense of belonging in the rheumatology community, social connection, and overall learning experience compared with more advanced participants. Eighty-five percent of early learners reported that RheumMadness increased their interest in rheumatology. CONCLUSION: RheumMadness expanded from 2021 to 2022, engaging more participants in collaborative learning. Our results demonstrate that RheumMadness is particularly impactful among medical students and residents by helping them explore rheumatology topics and connect with the rheumatology community.

Risk Factors and Outcomes Associated with Gaps in Care in Children with Congenital Heart Disease.

Adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) benefit from cardiology follow-up at recommended intervals of ≤ 2 years. However, benefit for children is less clear given limited studies and unclear current guidelines. We hypothesize there are identifiable risks for gaps in cardiology follow-up in children with CHD and that gaps in follow-up are associated with differences in healthcare utilization. Our cohort included children < 10 years old with CHD and a healthcare encounter from 2008 to 2013 at one of four North Carolina (NC) hospitals. We assessed associations between cardiology follow-up and demographics, lesion severity, healthcare access, and educational isolation (EI). We compared healthcare utilization based on follow-up. Overall, 60.4% of 6,969 children received cardiology follow-up within 2 years of initial encounter, including 53.1%, 58.1%, and 79.0% of those with valve, shunt, and severe lesions, respectively. Factors associated with gaps in care included increased drive time to a cardiology clinic (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.92/15-min increase), EI (HR 0.94/0.2-unit increase), lesion severity (HR 0.48 for shunt/valve vs severe), and older age (HR 0.95/month if < 1 year old and 0.94/year if > 1 year old; p < 0.05). Children with a care gap subsequently had more emergency department (ED) visits (Rate Ratio (RR) 1.59) and fewer inpatient encounters and procedures (RR 0.51, 0.35; p < 0.05). We found novel factors associated with gaps in care for cardiology follow-up in children with CHD and altered health care utilization with a gap. Our findings demonstrate a need to mitigate healthcare barriers and generate clear cardiology follow-up guidelines for children with CHD.

Effect of a Biopsychosocial Intervention or Postural Therapy on Disability and Health Care Spending Among Patients With Acute and Subacute Spine Pain: The SPINE CARE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Low back and neck pain are often self-limited, but health care spending remains high. Objective: To evaluate the effects of 2 interventions that emphasize noninvasive care for spine pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, cluster, randomized clinical trial conducted at 33 centers in the US that enrolled 2971 participants with neck or back pain of 3 months' duration or less (enrollment, June 2017 to March 2020; final follow-up, March 2021). Interventions: Participants were randomized at the clinic-level to (1) usual care (n = 992); (2) a risk-stratified, multidisciplinary intervention (the identify, coordinate, and enhance [ICE] care model that combines physical therapy, health coach counseling, and consultation from a specialist in pain medicine or rehabilitation) (n = 829); or (3) individualized postural therapy (IPT), a postural therapy approach that combines physical therapy with building self-efficacy and self-management (n = 1150). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at 3 months (range, 0 [best] to 100 [worst]; minimal clinically important difference, 6) and spine-related health care spending at 1 year. A 2-sided significance threshold of .025 was used to define statistical significance. Results: Among 2971 participants randomized (mean age, 51.7 years; 1792 women [60.3%]), 2733 (92%) finished the trial. Between baseline and 3-month follow-up, mean ODI scores changed from 31.2 to 15.4 for ICE, from 29.3 to 15.4 for IPT, and from 28.9 to 19.5 for usual care. At 3-month follow-up, absolute differences compared with usual care were -5.8 (95% CI, -7.7 to -3.9; P < .001) for ICE and -4.3 (95% CI, -5.9 to -2.6; P < .001) for IPT. Mean 12-month spending was $1448, $2528, and $1587 in the ICE, IPT, and usual care groups, respectively. Differences in spending compared with usual care were -$139 (risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.997]; P = .04) for ICE and $941 (risk ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.35 to 1.45]; P < .001) for IPT. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute or subacute spine pain, a multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention or an individualized postural therapy intervention, each compared with usual care, resulted in small but statistically significant reductions in pain-related disability at 3 months. However, compared with usual care, the biopsychosocial intervention resulted in no significant difference in spine-related health care spending and the postural therapy intervention resulted in significantly greater spine-related health care spending at 1 year. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03083886.