Field testing the transferability of behavioural science knowledge on promoting vaccinations.

As behavioural science is increasingly adopted by organizations, there is a growing need to assess the robustness and transferability of empirical findings. Here, we investigate the transferability of insights from various sources of behavioural science knowledge to field settings. Across three pre-registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs, N = 314,824) involving a critical policy domain-COVID-19 booster uptake-we field tested text-based interventions that either increased vaccinations in prior field work (RCT1, NCT05586204), elevated vaccination intentions in an online study (RCT2, NCT05586178) or were favoured by scientists and non-experts (RCT3, NCT05586165). Despite repeated exposure to COVID-19 vaccination messaging in our population, reminders and psychological ownership language increased booster uptake, replicating prior findings. However, strategies deemed effective by prediction or intention surveys, such as encouraging the bundling of COVID-19 boosters and flu shots or addressing misconceptions, yielded no detectable benefits over simple reminders. These findings underscore the importance of testing interventions' transferability to real-world settings.

Barriers to Implementation of Teleretinal Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Programs Across the University of California.

Aim: To describe barriers to implementation of diabetic retinopathy (DR) teleretinal screening programs and artificial intelligence (AI) integration at the University of California (UC). Methods: Institutional representatives from UC Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Irvine, and Davis were surveyed for the year of their program's initiation, active status at the time of survey (December 2021), number of primary care clinics involved, screening image quality, types of eye providers, image interpretation turnaround time, and billing codes used. Representatives were asked to rate perceptions toward barriers to teleretinal DR screening and AI implementation using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: Four UC campuses had active DR teleretinal screening programs at the time of survey and screened between 246 and 2,123 patients at 1-6 clinics per campus. Sites reported variation between poor-quality photos (<5% to 15%) and average image interpretation time (1-5 days). Patient education, resource availability, and infrastructural support were identified as barriers to DR teleretinal screening. Cost and integration into existing technology infrastructures were identified as barriers to AI integration in DR screening. Conclusions: Despite the potential to increase access to care, there remain several barriers to widespread implementation of DR teleretinal screening. More research is needed to develop best practices to overcome these barriers.

Effect of Patient Portal Messaging Before Mailing Fecal Immunochemical Test Kit on Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces CRC mortality; however, screening rates remain well below the national benchmark of 80%. Objective: To determine whether an electronic primer message delivered through the patient portal increases the completion rate of CRC screening in a mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach program. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical quality improvement trial at the University of California, Los Angeles Health of 2339 patients enrolled in a FIT mailing program from August 28, 2019, to September 20, 2020, patients were randomly assigned to either the control or intervention group, and the screening completion rate was measured at 6 months. Participants were average-risk managed care patients aged 50 to 75 years, with a valid mailing address, no mailed CRC outreach in the previous 6 months, and an active electronic health record (EHR) patient portal who were due for CRC screening. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Interventions: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either (1) the standard FIT mailed outreach (control group) or (2) the standard FIT mailed outreach plus an automated primer to notify patients of the upcoming mailed FIT sent through the electronic patient portal (intervention group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the screening completion rate (ie, returning the FIT). Secondary outcomes were (1) were the time to CRC screening from the FIT mailing date, (2) screening modality completed, and (3) the effect of opening the electronic primer on screening completion rate. Results: The study included 2339 patients (1346 women [57.5%]; mean [SD] age, 58.9 [7.5] years). The screening completion rate was higher in the intervention group than in the control group (37.6% [445 of 1182] vs 32.1% [371 of 1157]; P = .005). The time to screening was shorter in the intervention group than in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.42; P = .003). The proportion of each screening test modality completed was similar in both groups. In a subanalysis of the 900 of 1182 patients (76.1%) in the intervention group who opened the patient portal primer message, there was a 7.3-percentage point (95% CI, 2.3-12.4 percentage points) increase in CRC screening (local mean treatment effect; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: Implementation of an electronic patient portal primer message in a mailed FIT outreach program led to a significant increase in CRC screening and improvement in the time to screening completion. The findings provide an evidence base for additional refinements to mailed FIT outreach quality improvement programs in large health systems. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05115916.

Utilizing point-of-care A1c to impact outcomes - can we make it happen in primary care?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Hemoglobin A1c testing provides a marker of glycemic control and is the standard for diabetes risk assessment. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), only 67.3-71.4% of diabetic patients between 2011 and 2016 had at least two A1c levels tested per year. Moreover, 27.8% had uncontrolled diabetes with an A1c of ≥8.0%, increasing the risk of microvascular complications. Lack of monitoring presents a significant barrier, and improving ease of testing could improve glycemic control. RECENT FINDINGS: Point-of-care (POC) A1c testing, obtained via capillary blood with results provided in 5-6 min, is available and used frequently in endocrine clinics. However, POC A1c testing is not standard in primary care, where 90% of type 2 diabetes patients are treated. Barriers include access and costs of POC A1c machines and standardization of testing in the primary care setting. Review of literature, however, suggests that POC A1c testing in primary care may lead to A1c reduction whereas being potentially cost-effective and strengths the patient-physician relationship. SUMMARY: POC A1c testing in primary care, if widely available and integrated into workflow, has the potential to positively impact diabetes care. Real-time feedback may change patient and physician behaviors, allowing earlier therapeutic intensification.

Behavioural nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations.

Enhancing vaccine uptake is a critical public health challenge1. Overcoming vaccine hesitancy2,3 and failure to follow through on vaccination intentions3 requires effective communication strategies3,4. Here we present two sequential randomized controlled trials to test the effect of behavioural interventions on the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. We designed text-based reminders that make vaccination salient and easy, and delivered them to participants drawn from a healthcare system one day (first randomized controlled trial) (n = 93,354 participants; clinicaltrials number NCT04800965) and eight days (second randomized controlled trial) (n = 67,092 individuals; clinicaltrials number NCT04801524) after they received a notification of vaccine eligibility. The first reminder boosted appointment and vaccination rates within the healthcare system by 6.07 (84%) and 3.57 (26%) percentage points, respectively; the second reminder increased those outcomes by 1.65 and 1.06 percentage points, respectively. The first reminder had a greater effect when it was designed to make participants feel ownership of the vaccine dose. However, we found no evidence that combining the first reminder with a video-based information intervention designed to address vaccine hesitancy heightened its effect. We performed online studies (n = 3,181 participants) to examine vaccination intentions, which revealed patterns that diverged from those of the first randomized controlled trial; this underscores the importance of pilot-testing interventions in the field. Our findings inform the design of behavioural nudges for promoting health decisions5, and highlight the value of making vaccination easy and inducing feelings of ownership over vaccines.

Evaluation of antibiotic escalation in response to nurse-driven inpatient sepsis screen.

Objective: To determine the frequency and predictors of antibiotic escalation in response to the inpatient sepsis screen at our institution. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Two affiliated academic medical centers in Los Angeles, California. Patients: Hospitalized patients aged 18 years and older who had their first positive sepsis screen between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019, on acute-care wards. Methods: We described the rate and etiology of antibiotic escalation, and we conducted multivariable regression analyses of predictors of antibiotic escalation. Results: Of the 576 cases with a positive sepsis screen, antibiotic escalation occurred in 131 cases (22.7%). New infection was the most documented etiology of escalation, with 76 cases (13.2%), followed by known pre-existing infection, with 26 cases (4.5%). Antibiotics were continued past 3 days in 17 cases (3.0%) in which new or existing infection was not apparent. Abnormal temperature (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.91-4.70) and abnormal lactate (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.28-3.27) were significant predictors of antibiotic escalation. The patient already being on antibiotics (aOR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.89) and the positive screen occurred during a nursing shift change (aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.22-0.57) were negative predictors. Pneumonia was the most documented new infection, but only 19 (50%) of 38 pneumonia cases met full clinical diagnostic criteria. Conclusions: Inpatient sepsis screening led to a new infectious diagnosis in 13.2% of all positive sepsis screens, and the risk of prolonged antibiotic exposure without a clear infectious source was low. Pneumonia diagnostics and lactate testing are potential targets for future stewardship efforts.

Predictors of Out-of-ACO Care in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.

IMPORTANCE: Patients treated outside of their Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) accountable care organization (ACO) likely benefit less from the ACO's integration of care. Consequently, the MSSP's open-network design may preclude ACOs from improving value in care. OBJECTIVES: Quantify out-of-ACO care in a single urban ACO and examine associations between patient-level predictors and out-of-ACO expenditures. RESEARCH DESIGN: Secondary data analysis using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid ACO Program Claim and Claim Line Feed dataset (dates of service January 1, 2013-December 31, 2013). Two-part modeling was used to examine associations between patient-level predictors and likelihood and level of out-of-ACO expenditures. SUBJECTS: Patients were included if they were prospectively assigned to the MSSP in 2013. Patients were excluded if they declined to share data with the ACO, were not retrospectively confirmed to be in the ACO, or had missing data on covariates. Analytic sample included 11,922 patients. MEASURES: Total out-of-ACO expenditures and out-of-ACO expenditures by place of service. RESULTS: Of total expenditures, 32.9% were paid to out-of-ACO providers, and 89.8% of beneficiaries had out-of-ACO expenditures. The presence of almost all medical comorbidities increased out-of-ACO expenditures ($800-$3000 per comorbidity) across the study population. Racial/ethnic minority groups spent between $1076 and $1422 less outside of the ACO than white patients, which was driven by less out-of-ACO outpatient office expenditures ($417-$517 less for each racial/ethnic minority group). CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-ACO expenditures represented a significant portion of expenditures for the study population. Medically complex patients spent more outside of the ACO and represent an important population to study further.