Multimorbidity and associated informal care receiving characteristics for US older adults: a latent class analysis.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with varying patterns of multimorbidity may require distinct types of care and rely on informal caregiving to meet their care needs. This study aims to identify groups of older adults with distinct, empirically-determined multimorbidity patterns and compare characteristics of informal care received among estimated classes. METHODS: Data are from the 2011 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS). Ten chronic conditions were included to estimate multimorbidity patterns among 7532 individuals using latent class analysis. Multinomial logistic regression model was estimated to examine the association between sociodemographic characteristics, health status and lifestyle variables, care-receiving characteristics and latent class membership. RESULTS: A four-class solution identified the following multimorbidity groups: some somatic conditions with moderate cognitive impairment (30%), cardiometabolic (25%), musculoskeletal (24%), and multisystem (21%). Compared with those who reported receiving no help, care recipients who received help with household activities only (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.05-1.98), mobility but not self-care (OR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.05-2.53), or self-care but not mobility (OR = 2.07, 95% CI 1.29-3.31) had greater likelihood of being in the multisystem group versus the some-somatic group. Having more caregivers was associated with higher odds of being in the multisystem group compared with the some-somatic group (OR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.18), whereas receiving help from paid helpers was associated with lower odds of being in the multisystem group (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.19-0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Results highlighted different care needs among persons with distinct combinations of multimorbidity, in particular the wide range of informal needs among older adults with multisystem multimorbidity. Policies and interventions should recognize the differential care needs associated with multimorbidity patterns to better provide person-centered care.

What determines informal care need among community-dwelling older adults in China? Results from a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: With an intensified aging population and an associated upsurge of informal care need in China, there is an ongoing discussion around what factors influence this need among older adults. Most existing studies are cross-sectional and do not focus on older people living in the community. Conversely, this study empirically explores the factors that affect informal care need of Chinese community-dwelling older individuals based on longitudinal data. METHODS: This study constructed panel data using the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Research Study (CHARLS) from 2011 to 2018 for analysis. Generalized linear mixed models were used to analyze the factors affecting reception of informal care, and linear mixed models were used to analyze the factors affecting informal care sources and intensity. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, 7542, 6386, 5087, and 4052 older adults were included in 2011-2018, respectively. The proportion receiving informal care increased from 19.92 to 30.78%, and the proportion receiving high-intensity care increased from 6.42 to 8.42% during this period. Disability (estimate = 4.27, P < 0.001) and living arrangement (estimate = 0.42, P < 0.001) were the critical determinants of informal care need. The rural older adults reported a greater tendency to receive informal care (estimate = 0.14, P < 0.001). However, financial support from children did not affect informal care need (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is a great demand for the manpower and intensity of informal care, and the cost of informal care is on the rise. There are differences in informal care needs of special older groups, such as the oldest-old, living alone and severely disabled. In the future, the region should promote the balance of urban and rural care service resources, rationally tilt economic support resources to rural areas, reduce the inequality of long-term care resources, improve the informal care support system, and provide a strong community guarantee for the local aging of the older adults.

Informal care after hip fracture: prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is very common and it has life-shattering consequences for older persons. After discharge the older persons need help with even basic everyday activities from formal and informal caregivers. In Scandinavia formal care are well-developed however the presence of informal caregivers likely reflect on the amount of formal care and wears on the informal caregivers. This study explore how often and how much informal care (IC) older persons receive after hip fracture. METHOD: We contacted 244 community-dwelling older persons every two weeks the first twelve weeks after discharge after hip fracture and asked them if they received care from family and/or friends and how much. We used non-parametric statistics and level of significance was 95%. RESULTS: The proportion of older persons receiving IC was 90% and the median amount of IC was 32 hours (IQR 14-66). The number of older persons who received IC was highest the first four weeks after discharge and so was the amount of hours of IC. The older persons that were high-dependence on IC received a median of 66 (IQR 46-107) hours compared to the low-dependent of 11 hours (IQR 2-20). CONCLUSION: IC is very frequent, especially the first two to four weeks after discharge. The median IC was 32 hours from discharge to the 12-week follow-up. However, this figure tended to rise for persons with, among other, reduced functionality and those residing with a partner. IMPLICATIONS: With respect to local differences, the findings in this study are likely applicable to other Scandinavian countries. We strongly suggest that the variation in older person need for informal caregiver be given consideration in the prioritisation of resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This prospective cohort study of informal care, was part of a cluster-randomised stepped-wedge clinical controlled trial. Written consent was obtained required by regional ethics committee S-20200070. Data was collected in accordance with the Danish Data Protection Agency (20-21854).

Informal care provided in US nursing homes: Reduced from 2010 to 2021 and lower for Medicaid residents.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the trend of informal care (unpaid care provided by family or other caregivers) provided to nursing home residents before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study assessed this trend during 2010-2021, for all and Medicaid versus non-Medicaid residents. METHODS: Using data from the RAND Health and Retirement Study longitudinal file, our study sample included a total of 2025 resident-years (860 for Medicaid and 1165 for non-Medicaid residents). We fit two-part regression models to determine adjusted trends in average amount of informal care over time, and difference by resident Medicaid status. RESULTS: Informal care received by residents reduced substantially over time, from an average of 39.2 h in the past month of interview in 2010-11 to 23.2 h in 2018-19, and then to 11.2 h in the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-21). The reduced hours were due to both reduced percentages of nursing home residents who received any informal care and reduced hours of care among those who did receive it over time. Multivariable analyses confirmed this trend and similar downward trends for Medicaid versus non-Medicaid residents. Medicaid residents on average received 10.02 fewer hours of informal care per month (95% confidence interval -17.16, -2.87; p = 0.006) than non-Medicaid residents after adjustment for resident characteristics and time trends. CONCLUSION: Informal care provided to nursing home residents during 2010-2021 reduced over time, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-21). Medicaid residents tended to receive less informal care than non-Medicaid residents.

Trends in Active Treatment of Live-born Neonates Between 22 Weeks 0 Days and 25 Weeks 6 Days by Gestational Age and Maternal Race and Ethnicity in the US, 2014 to 2020.

Importance: Birth in the periviable period between 22 weeks 0 days and 25 weeks 6 days' gestation is a major source of neonatal morbidity and mortality, and the decision to initiate active life-saving treatment is challenging. Objective: To assess whether the frequency of active treatment among live-born neonates in the periviable period has changed over time and whether active treatment differed by gestational age at birth and race and ethnicity. Design, Setting, and Participants: Serial cross-sectional descriptive study using National Center for Health Statistics natality data from 2014 to 2020 for 61 908 singleton live births without clinical anomalies between 22 weeks 0 days and 25 weeks 6 days in the US. Exposures: Year of delivery, gestational age at birth, and race and ethnicity of the pregnant individual, stratified as non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latina, and non-Hispanic White. Main Outcomes and Measures: Active treatment, determined by whether there was an attempt to treat the neonate and defined as a composite of surfactant therapy, immediate assisted ventilation at birth, assisted ventilation more than 6 hours in duration, and/or antibiotic therapy. Frequencies, mean annual percent change (APC), and adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) were estimated. Results: Of 26 986 716 live births, 61 908 (0.2%) were periviable live births included in this study: 5% were Asian/Pacific Islander, 37% Black, 24% Hispanic, and 34% White; and 14% were born at 22 weeks, 21% at 23 weeks, 30% at 24 weeks, and 34% at 25 weeks. Fifty-two percent of neonates received active treatment. From 2014 to 2020, the overall frequency (mean APC per year) of active treatment increased significantly (3.9% [95% CI, 3.0% to 4.9%]), as well as among all racial and ethnic subgroups (Asian/Pacific Islander: 3.4% [95% CI, 0.8% to 6.0%]); Black: 4.7% [95% CI, 3.4% to 5.9%]; Hispanic: 4.7% [95% CI, 3.4% to 5.9%]; and White: 3.1% [95% CI, 1.1% to 4.4%]) and among each gestational age range (22 weeks: 14.4% [95% CI, 11.1% to 17.7%] and 25 weeks: 2.9% [95% CI, 1.5% to 4.2%]). Compared with neonates born to White individuals (57.0%), neonates born to Asian/Pacific Islander (46.2%; risk difference [RD], -10.81 [95% CI, -12.75 to -8.88]; aRR, 0.82 [95% CI, [0.79-0.86]), Black (51.6%; RD, -5.42 [95% CI, -6.36 to -4.50]; aRR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.89 to 0.92]), and Hispanic (48.0%; RD, -9.03 [95% CI, -10.07 to -7.99]; aRR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.85]) individuals were significantly less likely to receive active treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: From 2014 to 2020 in the US, the frequency of active treatment among neonates born alive between 22 weeks 0 days and 25 weeks 6 days significantly increased, and there were differences in rates of active treatment by race and ethnicity.

Teaming in the contemporary fertility clinic: creating a culture to optimize patient care.

When a diverse group of individuals is working together in the contemporary fertility clinic to provide time-sensitive and complex care for patients, a high degree of coordination and collaboration must take place. When performed dynamically, this process is referred to as teaming. Although the positive impact of teamwork in health care settings has been well established in the literature, the concept of teaming has limited foundation in the clinic. This review will provide an overview of how teaming can be used to improve patient care in today's fertility clinics. Approaches to integrating teaming into the clinic that will be discussed include framing, the creation of a psychologically safe environment for staff input, and facilitating collaborative constructs to support teaming. Best practices to implement teaming and how to address challenges to teaming in today's clinical environment will also be addressed.

Individualized therapy trials: navigating patient care, research goals and ethics.

'Individualized therapy' trials (sometimes called n-of-1 trials) use patients as their own controls to evaluate treatments. Here we divide such trials into three categories: multi-crossover trials aimed at individual patient management, multi-crossover trial series and pre-post trials. These trials all customize interventions for patients; however, the latter two categories also aim to inform medical practice and thus embody tensions between the goals of care and research that are typical of other types of clinical trials. In this Perspective, we discuss four domains where such tensions play out-clinical equipoise, informed consent, reporting and funding, and we provide recommendations for addressing each.

Patients, procedures, and PPE: Safe office-based anesthesia recommendations in the COVID-19 era.

The growth of office-based surgery (OBS) has been due to ease of scheduling and convenience for patients; office-based anesthesia safety continues to be well supported in the literature. In 2020, the Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) has resulted in dramatic shifts in healthcare, especially in the office-based setting. The goal of closing the economy was to flatten the curve, impacting office-based and ambulatory practices. Reopening of the economy and the return to ambulatory surgery and OBS and procedures have created a challenge due to COVID-19 and the infectious disease precautions that must be taken. Patients may be more apt to return to the outpatient setting to avoid the hospital, especially with the resurgence of COVID-19 cases locally, nationally, and worldwide. This review provides algorithms for screening and testing patients, selecting patients for procedures, choosing appropriate procedures, and selecting suitable personal protective equipment in this unprecedented period.

The "collateral damage" of the war on COVID-19: impact of the pandemic on the care of epithelial ovarian cancer.

The covid-19 pandemic has impacted the management of non-covid-19 illnesses. Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) requires long-duration multidisciplinary treatment. Teleconsultation and shared care are suggested solutions to mitigate the consequences of the pandemic. However, these may be challenging to implement among patients who come from the lower economic strata. We report the disastrous impact of the pandemic on the care of EOC by comparing patients who were treated during the pandemic with those treated in the previous year. We collected the following data from newly diagnosed patients with EOC: time from diagnosis to treatment, time for completion of planned chemotherapy, and proportion of patients completing various components of therapy (surgery and chemotherapy). Patients treated between January 2019 and September 2019 (Group 1: Pre-covid) were compared with those treated between January 2020 and December 2020 (Group 2: During covid pandemic). A total of 82 patients were registered [Group 1: 43(51%) Group 2: 39(49)]. The median time from diagnosis to start of treatment was longer in group 2 when compared to group 1 [31(23-58) days versus 17(11-30) days (p = 0.03)]. The proportion of patients who had surgery in group 2 was lower in comparison to group 1 [33(77%) versus 21(54%) (p = 0.02)]. Proportion of patients who underwent neoadjuvant (NACT) and surgery were fewer in group 2 in comparison to group 1 [9(33%) versus 18(64%) p = 0.002]. Among patients planned for adjuvant chemotherapy, the median time from diagnosis to treatment was longer in group 2 [28(17-45) days, group 1 versus 49(26-78) days, group 2 (p = 0.04)]. The treatment of patients with EOC was adversely impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a compromise in the proportion of patients completing planned therapy. Even among those who completed the treatment, there were considerable delays when compared with the pre-covid period. The impact of these compromises on the outcomes will be known with longer follow-up.

[New patient care techniques: nutritional coaching]. / Nuevas técnicas de atención al paciente: el coaching nutricional.

INTRODUCTION: To achieve behavioral changes, as well as to prevent the appearance of non-communicable diseases, nutritional education has traditionally been used. However, the prevalence of some chronic diseases is still increasing. This has led to the development of new patient care techniques such as nutritional coaching, in which the patient plays an active role during the change process. The available scientific evidence indicates that nutritional coaching, as well as health coaching, is an effective tool to achieve lasting changes in diet and lifestyle.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Para conseguir cambios de comportamiento, así como para prevenir la aparición de enfermedades no transmisibles, tradicionalmente se ha empleado la educación nutricional. Sin embargo, la prevalencia de algunas enfermedades crónicas sigue aumentado. Esto ha hecho que se hayan desarrollado nuevas técnicas de atención al paciente como el coaching,, así como el coaching de salud, en el que el paciente juega un papel activo durante el proceso del cambio. La evidencia científica disponible señala que el coaching nutricional es una herramienta efectiva para conseguir cambios duraderos en la dieta y el estilo de vida.

New Horizons-Addressing Healthcare Disparities in Endocrine Disease: Bias, Science, and Patient Care.

Unacceptable healthcare disparities in endocrine disease have persisted for decades, and 2021 presents a difficult evolving environment. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the gross structural inequities that drive health disparities, and antiracism demonstrations remind us that the struggle for human rights continues. Increased public awareness and discussion of disparities present an urgent opportunity to advance health equity. However, it is more complicated to change the behavior of individuals and reform systems because societies are polarized into different factions that increasingly believe, accept, and live different realities. To reduce health disparities, clinicians must (1) truly commit to advancing health equity and intentionally act to reduce health disparities; (2) create a culture of equity by looking inwards for personal bias and outwards for the systemic biases built into their everyday work processes; (3) implement practical individual, organizational, and community interventions that address the root causes of the disparities; and (4) consider their roles in addressing social determinants of health and influencing healthcare payment policy to advance health equity. To care for diverse populations in 2021, clinicians must have self-insight and true understanding of heterogeneous patients, knowledge of evidence-based interventions, ability to adapt messaging and approaches, and facility with systems change and advocacy. Advancing health equity requires both science and art; evidence-based roadmaps and stories that guide the journey to better outcomes, judgment that informs how to change the behavior of patients, providers, communities, organizations, and policymakers, and passion and a moral mission to serve humanity.

Optimizing the Potential for Telehealth in Cardiovascular Care (in the Era of COVID-19): Time Will Tell.

Before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, use of telehealth services had been limited in cardiovascular care. Potential benefits of telehealth include improved access to care, more efficient care management, reduced costs, the ability to assess patients within their homes while involving key caretakers in medical decisions, maintaining social distance, and increased patient satisfaction. Challenges include changes in payment models, issues with data security and privacy, potential depersonalization of the patient-clinician relationship, limitations in the use of digital health technologies, and the potential impact on disparities, including socioeconomic, gender, and age-related issues and access to technology and broadband. Implementation and expansion of telehealth from a policy and reimbursement practice standpoint are filled with difficult decisions, yet addressing these are critical to the future of health care.

Is There a Replication Crisis in Medical Education Research?

Scholars are increasingly aware that studies-across many disciplines-cannot be replicated by independent researchers. Here, the authors describe how medical education research may be vulnerable to this "replication crisis," explain how researchers can act together to reduce risks, and discuss the positive steps that can increase confidence in research findings. Medical education research contributes to policy and influences practitioner behavior. Findings that cannot be replicated suggest that the original research was not credible. This risk raises the possibility that unhelpful or even harmful changes to medical education have been implemented as a result of research that appeared defensible but was not. By considering these risk factors, researchers can increase the likelihood that studies are generating credible results. The authors discuss and provide examples of 6 factors that may endanger the replicability of medical education research: (1) small sample sizes, (2) small effect sizes, (3) exploratory designs, (4) flexibility in design choices, analysis strategy, and outcome measures, (5) conflicts of interest, and (6) very active fields with many competing research teams. Importantly, medical education researchers can adopt techniques used successfully elsewhere to improve the rigor of their investigations. Researchers can improve their work through better planning in the development stage, carefully considering design choices, and using sensible data analysis. The wider medical education community can help by encouraging higher levels of collaboration among medical educators, by routinely evaluating existing educational innovations, and by raising the prestige of replication and collaborative medical education research. Medical education journals should adopt new approaches to publishing. As medical education research improves, so too will the quality of medical education and patient care.