RESUMEN
Modern artificial intelligence (AI) tools built on high-dimensional patient data are reshaping oncology care, helping to improve goal-concordant care, decrease cancer mortality rates, and increase workflow efficiency and scope of care. However, data-related concerns and human biases that seep into algorithms during development and post-deployment phases affect performance in real-world settings, limiting the utility and safety of AI technology in oncology clinics. To this end, the authors review the current potential and limitations of predictive AI for cancer diagnosis and prognostication as well as of generative AI, specifically modern chatbots, which interfaces with patients and clinicians. They conclude the review with a discussion on ongoing challenges and regulatory opportunities in the field.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Oncología Médica , Neoplasias , Humanos , Oncología Médica/métodos , Neoplasias/terapia , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Algoritmos , PronósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread implementation of telemedicine, there are limited data regarding its impact on key components of care for patients with incurable or high-risk cancer. For these patients, high-quality care requires detailed conversations regarding treatment priorities (advance care planning) and clinical care to minimize unnecessary acute care (unplanned hospitalizations). Whether telemedicine affects these outcomes relative to in-person clinic visits was examined among patients with cancer at high risk for 6-month mortality. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients with cancer with any tumor type treated at the University of Pennsylvania who were newly identified between April 1 and December 31, 2020, to be at high risk for 6-month mortality via a validated machine learning algorithm. Separate modified Poisson regressions were used to assess the occurrence of advance care planning and unplanned hospitalizations for telemedicine as compared to in-person visits. Additional analyses were done comparing telemedicine type (video or phone) as compared to in-person clinic visits. RESULTS: The occurrence of advance care planning was similar between telemedicine and in-person visits (6.8% vs. 6.0%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.92-1.69). In regard to telemedicine subtype, patients exposed to video encounters were modestly more likely to have documented advance care planning in comparison to those seen in person (7.5% vs. 6.0%; aRR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.03-2.11). The 3-month risk for unplanned hospitalization was comparable for telemedicine compared to in-person clinic encounters (21% vs. 18%; aRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.81-1.38). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, care delivered by telemedicine, compared to in-person clinic visits, produced comparable rates of advance care planning conversations without increasing hospitalizations, which suggests that vulnerable patients can be managed safely by telemedicine.
Asunto(s)
Planificación Anticipada de Atención , Neoplasias , Telemedicina , Humanos , Adulto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hospitalización , Neoplasias/terapiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To analyze ophthalmology workforce supply and demand projections from 2020 to 2035. DESIGN: Observational cohort study using data from the National Center for Health Workforce Analysis (NCHWA). METHODS: Data accessed from the Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) website were compiled to analyze the workforce supply and demand projections for ophthalmologists from 2020 to 2035. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Projected workforce adequacy over time. RESULTS: From 2020 to 2035, the total ophthalmology supply is projected to decrease by 2650 full-time equivalent (FTE) ophthalmologists (12% decline) and total demand is projected to increase by 5150 FTE ophthalmologists (24% increase), representing a supply and demand mismatch of 30% workforce inadequacy. The level of projected adequacy was markedly different based on rurality by year 2035 with 77% workforce adequacy versus 29% workforce adequacy in metro and nonmetro geographies, respectively. By year 2035, ophthalmology is projected to have the second worst rate of workforce adequacy (70%) of 38 medical and surgical specialties studied. CONCLUSIONS: The HRSA's Health Workforce Simulation Model forecasts a sizeable shortage of ophthalmology supply relative to demand by the year 2035, with substantial geographic disparities. Ophthalmology is one of the medical specialties with the lowest rate of projected workforce adequacy by 2035. Further dedicated workforce supply and demand research for ophthalmology and allied professionals is needed to validate these projections, which may have significant future implications for patients and providers. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Asunto(s)
Oftalmología , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Recursos Humanos , Fuerza Laboral en Salud , Simulación por ComputadorRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Germline genetic testing is a vital component of guideline-recommended cancer care for males with pancreatic, breast, or metastatic prostate cancers. We sought to determine whether there were racial disparities in germline genetic testing completion in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included non-Hispanic White and Black males with incident pancreatic, breast, or metastatic prostate cancers between January 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. Two nationwide cohorts were examined: (1) commercially insured individuals in an administrative claims database, and (2) Veterans receiving care in the Veterans Health Administration. One-year germline genetic testing rates were estimated by using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to test the association between race and genetic testing completion. Causal mediation analyses were performed to investigate whether socioeconomic variables contributed to associations between race and germline testing. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 7,894 males (5,142 commercially insured; 2,752 Veterans). One-year testing rates were 18.0% (95% CI, 16.8%-19.2%) in commercially insured individuals and 14.2% (95% CI, 11.5%-15.0%) in Veterans. Black race was associated with a lower hazard of testing among commercially insured individuals (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.91; P=.005) but not among Veterans (aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.75-1.32; P=.960). In commercially insured individuals, income (aHR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96) and net worth (aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98) mediated racial disparities, whereas education (aHR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.01) did not. CONCLUSIONS: Overall rates of guideline-recommended genetic testing are low in males with pancreatic, breast, or metastatic prostate cancers. Racial disparities in genetic testing among males exist in a commercially insured population, mediated by net worth and household income; these disparities are not seen in the equal-access Veterans Health Administration. Alleviating financial and access barriers may mitigate racial disparities in genetic testing.
Asunto(s)
Pruebas Genéticas , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias de la Próstata/genética , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Pruebas Genéticas/estadística & datos numéricos , Pruebas Genéticas/métodos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/genética , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Mutación de Línea Germinal , Neoplasias de la Mama Masculina/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama Masculina/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama Masculina/patología , Estados Unidos , Adulto , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Negro o Afroamericano/genéticaRESUMEN
Though artificial intelligence (AI) is being widely implemented in gastroenterology (GI) and hepatology and has the potential to be paradigm shifting for clinical practice, its pitfalls must be considered along with its advantages. Currently, although the use of AI is limited in practice to supporting clinical judgment, medicine is rapidly heading toward a global environment where AI will be increasingly autonomous. Broader implementation of AI will require careful ethical considerations, specifically related to bias, privacy, and consent. Widespread use of AI raises concerns related to increasing rates of systematic errors, potentially due to bias introduced in training datasets. We propose that a central repository for collection and analysis for training and validation datasets is essential to overcoming potential biases. Since AI does not have built-in concepts of bias and equality, humans involved in AI development and implementation must ensure its ethical use and development. Moreover, ethical concerns regarding data ownership and health information privacy are likely to emerge, obviating traditional methods of obtaining patient consent that cover all possible uses of patient data. The question of liability in case of adverse events related to use of AI in GI must be addressed among the physician, the healthcare institution, and the AI developer. Though the future of AI in GI is very promising, herein we review the ethical considerations in need of additional guidance informed by community experience and collective expertise.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Gastroenterología , Inteligencia Artificial/ética , Humanos , Gastroenterología/ética , Consentimiento Informado/ética , Confidencialidad/éticaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We sought to understand factors that are important to patients for the management of recurrent urinary tract infections (UTI) during both an acute episode and for the prevention of future episodes. METHODS: This was a qualitative study with focus groups in women with recurrent UTIs. Participants filled out information about prior recurrent UTI treatment and the Belief about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ). Each 90-minute focus group was moderated by a nonphysician psychologist. Line-by-line coding of each transcript by three independent physicians was used to develop emergent concepts and themes using Grounded Theory methodology. RESULTS: Twenty-six women participated in six focus groups. The average age of participants was 62 years and 77% were post-menopausal. All women had already tried multiple prevention strategies for their recurrent UTIs. The average BMQ-specific scores indicated a net positive attitude toward medicines specifically prescribed for recurrent UTI prevention. Several themes emerged from the focus groups. First, patients wanted providers to acknowledge the high burden imposed by frequent interactions with the health care system for the management of recurrent UTI. Second, patients wanted earlier access to providers knowledgeable in the management of this condition. Third, patients wanted to self-manage their condition through a structured treatment plan with support from their providers. Finally, patients wanted greater emphasis on education and prevention strategies to reduce their antibiotic intake. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recurrent UTI want more efficient workflows, a framework that promotes self-management in partnership with their providers, and a greater emphasis on prevention.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Infecciones Urinarias , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Grupos Focales , Investigación Cualitativa , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Escolaridad , Infecciones Urinarias/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Urinarias/prevención & controlRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To determine how often ChatGPT is able to provide accurate and comprehensive information regarding clinical vitreoretinal scenarios. To assess the types of sources ChatGPT primarily uses and to determine whether they are hallucinated. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. The authors designed 40 open-ended clinical scenarios across four main topics in vitreoretinal disease. Responses were graded on correctness and comprehensiveness by three blinded retina specialists. The primary outcome was the number of clinical scenarios that ChatGPT answered correctly and comprehensively. Secondary outcomes included theoretical harm to patients, the distribution of the type of references used by the chatbot, and the frequency of hallucinated references. RESULTS: In June 2023, ChatGPT answered 83% of clinical scenarios (33/40) correctly but provided a comprehensive answer in only 52.5% of cases (21/40). Subgroup analysis demonstrated an average correct score of 86.7% in neovascular age-related macular degeneration, 100% in diabetic retinopathy, 76.7% in retinal vascular disease, and 70% in the surgical domain. There were six incorrect responses with one case (16.7%) of no harm, three cases (50%) of possible harm, and two cases (33.3%) of definitive harm. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT correctly answered more than 80% of complex open-ended vitreoretinal clinical scenarios, with a reduced capability to provide a comprehensive response.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Enfermedades de la Retina , Cirugía Vitreorretiniana , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedades de la Retina/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer undergoing chemotherapy experience significant symptoms and declines in functional status, which are associated with poor outcomes. Remote monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PROs; symptoms) and step counts (functional status) may proactively identify patients at risk of hospitalization or death. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the association of (1) longitudinal PROs with step counts and (2) PROs and step counts with hospitalization or death. METHODS: The PROStep randomized trial enrolled 108 patients with advanced gastrointestinal or lung cancers undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy at a large academic cancer center. Patients were randomized to weekly text-based monitoring of 8 PROs plus continuous step count monitoring via Fitbit (Google) versus usual care.â¯This preplanned secondary analysis included 57 of 75 patients randomized to the intervention who had PRO and step count data. We analyzed the associations between PROs and mean daily step counts and the associations of PROs and step counts with the composite outcome of hospitalization or death using bootstrapped generalized linear models to account for longitudinal data. RESULTS: Among 57 patients, the mean age was 57 (SD 10.9) years, 24 (42%) were female, 43 (75%) had advanced gastrointestinal cancer, 14 (25%) had advanced lung cancer, and 25 (44%) were hospitalized or died during follow-up. A 1-point weekly increase (on a 32-point scale) in aggregate PRO score was associated with 247 fewer mean daily steps (95% CI -277 to -213; P<.001). PROs most strongly associated with step count decline were patient-reported activity (daily step change -892), nausea score (-677), and constipation score (524). A 1-point weekly increase in aggregate PRO score was associated with 20% greater odds of hospitalization or death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4; P=.01). PROs most strongly associated with hospitalization or death were pain (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6-6.5; P<.001), decreased activity (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 1.4-7.1; P=.01), dyspnea (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.2-5.5; P=.02), and sadness (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.3; P=.03). A decrease in 1000 steps was associated with 16% greater odds of hospitalization or death (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.3; P=.03). Compared with baseline, mean daily step count decreased 7% (n=274 steps), 9% (n=351 steps), and 16% (n=667 steps) in the 3, 2, and 1 weeks before hospitalization or death, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial among patients with advanced cancer, higher symptom burden and decreased step count were independently associated with and predictably worsened close to hospitalization or death. Future interventions should leverage longitudinal PRO and step count data to target interventions toward patients at risk for poor outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04616768; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04616768. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054675.
Asunto(s)
Hospitalización , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Anciano , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/mortalidad , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/mortalidadRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The 2022 Coffey-Holden Prostate Cancer Academy (CHPCA) Meeting, "Exploring New Frontiers in Prostate Cancer Research," was held from June 23 to 26, 2022, at the University of California, Los Angeles, Luskin Conference Center, in Los Angeles, CA. METHODS: The CHPCA Meeting is an annual discussion-oriented scientific conference organized by the Prostate Cancer Foundation, that focuses on emerging and next-step topics deemed critical for making the next major advances in prostate cancer research and clinical care. The 2022 CHPCA Meeting included 35 talks over 10 sessions and was attended by 73 academic investigators. RESULTS: Major topic areas discussed at the meeting included: prostate cancer diversity and disparities, the impact of social determinants on research and patient outcomes, leveraging real-world and retrospective data, development of artificial intelligence biomarkers, androgen receptor (AR) signaling biology and new strategies for targeting AR, features of homologous recombination deficient prostate cancer, and future directions in immunotherapy and nuclear theranostics. DISCUSSION: This article summarizes the scientific presentations from the 2022 CHPCA Meeting, with the goal that dissemination of this knowledge will contribute to furthering global prostate cancer research efforts.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Inteligencia Artificial , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Próstata , Neoplasias de la Próstata/genética , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medicina de Precisión/métodosRESUMEN
The merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) is a value-based payment model created by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to promote high-value care through performance-based adjustments of Medicare reimbursements. In this cross-sectional study, we examined the participation and performance of oncologists in the 2019 MIPS. Oncologist participation was low (86%) compared to all-specialty participation (97%). After adjusting for practice characteristics, higher MIPS scores were observed among oncologists with alternative payment models (APMs) as their filing source (mean score, 91 for APMs vs. 77.6 for individuals; difference, 13.41 [95% CI, 12.21, 14.6]), indicating the importance of greater organizational resources for participants. Lower scores were associated with greater patient complexity (mean score, 83.4 for highest quintile vs. 84.9 for lowest quintile, difference, -1.43 [95% CI, -2.48, -0.37]), suggesting the need for better risk-adjustment by CMS. Our findings may guide future efforts to improve oncologist engagement in MIPS.
Asunto(s)
Medicare , Oncólogos , Anciano , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Motivación , Estudios Transversales , Reembolso de IncentivoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) medications for intraocular use are a major and increasing cost, and biosimilars may be a means of reducing the high cost of many biologic medications. However, a bevacizumab biosimilar, which is currently pending Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval (bevacizumab-vikg), paradoxically may increase the cost burden of intravitreal anti-VEGF agents, because off-label repackaged drugs may no longer be allowed per the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA). We aimed to investigate the potential impact of biosimilars on costs in the United States. DESIGN: Cost analysis of anti-VEGF medications. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare data from October 2022 and previously published market share data from 2019. METHODS: Average sales prices (ASPs) of ranibizumab, aflibercept, and bevacizumab were calculated from Medicare allowable payments. The ASPs of biosimilars were calculated from wholesale acquisition costs from a representative distributor. The cost of an intraocular bevacizumab formulation is modeled at $500/1.25-mg dose and $900/1.25-mg dose. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs of anti-VEGF drugs to Medicare Part B and patients. RESULTS: If an intraocular bevacizumab biosimilar were to be priced at $500, costs to Medicare would increase by $457 million from $3.01 billion to $3.47 billion (15.2% increase). Patient responsibility would increase by $117 million from $768 million to $884 million. Similarly, if intraocular bevacizumab were priced at $900, Medicare costs would increase by $897 million to $3.91 billion (29.8% increase), and patient responsibility would increase by $229 million to $997 million. If bevacizumab were $500/dose, switching all patients currently receiving ranibizumab or aflibercept to respective biosimilars would compensate for only 28.8% of the increased cost. Current prices of ranibizumab and aflibercept biosimilars would have to decrease by an aggregate of 15.7% to $616.80/injection, $1027.97/injection, and $1436.88/injection for ranibizumab 0.3 mg, ranibizumab 0.5 mg, and aflibercept, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: An FDA-approved bevacizumab biosimilar for ophthalmic use could increase costs to the health care system and patients, raising concerns for access. This increase would not be offset by ranibizumab and aflibercept biosimilar use at current prices. These data support the need for an exemption of section 503B of the DQSA and continued use of repackaged off-label bevacizumab. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Asunto(s)
Biosimilares Farmacéuticos , Medicare Part B , Anciano , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Ranibizumab , Bevacizumab , Biosimilares Farmacéuticos/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis/uso terapéutico , Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/uso terapéutico , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/uso terapéutico , Inyecciones IntravítreasRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Physician turnover is costly to health care systems and affects patient experience due to discontinuity of care. This study aimed to assess the frequency of turnover by ophthalmologists and identify physician and practice characteristics associated with turnover. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Actively practicing United States ophthalmologists included in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Compare and Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File between 2014 and 2021. METHODS: We collected data for each ophthalmologist that was associated with practice/institution and then calculated the rate of turnover both annually in each year window and cumulatively as the total proportion from 2014 to 2021. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with turnover. We also evaluated turnover characteristics surrounding the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ophthalmologist turnover, defined as a change of an ophthalmologist's National Provider Identifier practice affiliation from one year to the next. RESULTS: Of 13 264 ophthalmologists affiliated with 3306 unique practices, 34.1% separated from at least 1 practice between 2014 and 2021. Annual turnover ranged from 3.7% (2017) to 19.4% (2018), with an average rate of 9.4%. Factors associated with increased turnover included solo practice (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 9.59), university affiliation (aOR, 1.55), practice location in the Northeast (aOR, 1.39), and practice size of 2 to 4 members (aOR, 1.21; P < 0.05 for all). Factors associated with decreased turnover included male gender (aOR, 0.87) and more than 5 years of practice: 6 to 10 years (aOR, 0.63), 11 to 19 years (aOR, 0.54), 20 to 29 years (aOR, 0.36), and ≥ 30 years (aOR, 0.18; P < 0.05 for all). In the initial year (2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic, annual turnover increased from 7.8% to 11.0%, then decreased to 8.7% in the postvaccine period (2021). CONCLUSIONS: One-third of United States ophthalmologists separated from at least 1 practice from 2014 through 2021. Turnover patterns differed by various physician and practice characteristics, which may be used to develop future strategies for workforce stability. Because administrative data cannot solely determine reasons for turnover, further investigation is warranted given the potential clinical and financial implications. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Oftalmólogos , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios Transversales , Pandemias , Medicare , COVID-19/epidemiología , Recursos HumanosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Serious illness communication in oncology increases goal concordant care. Factors associated with the frequency of serious illness conversations are not well understood. Given prior evidence of the association between suboptimal decision-making and clinic time, we aimed to investigate the relationship between appointment time and the likelihood of serious illness conversations in oncology. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of electronic health record data from 55 367 patient encounters between June 2019 to April 2020, using generalized estimating equations to model the likelihood of a serious illness conversation across clinic time. RESULTS: Documentation rate decreased from 2.1 to 1.5% in the morning clinic session (8am-12pm) and from 1.2% to .9% in the afternoon clinic session (1pm-4pm). Adjusted odds ratios for Serious illness conversations documentation rates were significantly lower for all hours of each session after the earliest hour (adjusted odds ratios .91 [95% CI, .84-.97], P = .006 for overall linear trend). CONCLUSIONS: Serious illness conversations between oncologists and patients decrease considerably through the clinic day, and proactive strategies to avoid missed conversations should be investigated.
Asunto(s)
Oncología Médica , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Comunicación , Enfermedad CríticaRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Private equity investment in ophthalmology has dramatically increased over the past 20âyears. Despite a massive influx in private equity investment in ophthalmology, little is known regarding if and how private equity investment might affect practice behavior. This review seeks to discuss why private equity investment may be expanding in ophthalmology and explore recent data on demographic and billing trends before and after private equity acquisition. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent publications have identified ophthalmology and optometry practices acquired by private equity from 2012 to 2021. Practice demographics and provider billing habits before and after private equity acquisition were analyzed from 2012 to 2019 and 2012 to 2017, respectively, using Internal Revenue Service, United States Census, and Medicare fee-for-service data. SUMMARY: Private equity investment in ophthalmology is increasing and may be because of a growing demand from an aging population, fragmented network of healthcare practices, and potential for ancillary billable services. Private equity practices acquired between 2012 and 2019 were mostly in metropolitan areas with higher proportions of private insurance coverage. Ophthalmologists and optometrists in practices acquired between 2012 and 2016 showed increased utilization of diagnostic testing and cataract surgery in the year following private equity acquisition compared with the year prior to private equity acquisition.
Asunto(s)
Extracción de Catarata , Oftalmólogos , Oftalmología , Optometría , Anciano , Humanos , Medicare , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Oncologists may overestimate prognosis for patients with cancer, leading to delayed or missed conversations about patients' goals and subsequent low-quality end-of-life care. Machine learning algorithms may accurately predict mortality risk in cancer, but it is unclear how oncology clinicians would use such algorithms in practice. METHODS: The purpose of this qualitative study was to assess oncology clinicians' perceptions on the utility and barriers of machine learning prognostic algorithms to prompt advance care planning. Participants included medical oncology physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) practicing in tertiary and community practices within a large academic healthcare system. Transcripts were coded and analyzed inductively using NVivo software. RESULTS: The study included 29 oncology clinicians (19 physicians, 10 APPs) across 6 practice sites (1 tertiary, 5 community) in the USA. Fourteen participants had previously had exposure to an automated machine learning-based prognostic algorithm as part of a pragmatic randomized trial. Clinicians believed that there was utility for algorithms in validating their own intuition about prognosis and prompting conversations about patient goals and preferences. However, this enthusiasm was tempered by concerns about algorithm accuracy, over-reliance on algorithm predictions, and the ethical implications around disclosure of an algorithm prediction. There was significant variation in tolerance for false positive vs. false negative predictions. CONCLUSION: While oncologists believe there are applications for advanced prognostic algorithms in routine care of patients with cancer, they are concerned about algorithm accuracy, confirmation and automation biases, and ethical issues of prognostic disclosure.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Oncólogos , Algoritmos , Humanos , Aprendizaje Automático , Oncología Médica , Neoplasias/terapia , PronósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Depression is common after a diagnosis of prostate cancer and may contribute to poor outcomes, particularly among African Americans. The authors assessed the incidence and management of depression and its impact on overall mortality among African American and White veterans with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: The authors used the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse to identify 40,412 African American and non-Hispanic White men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2001 to 2013. Patients were followed through 2019. Multivariable logistic regression was used to measure associations between race and incident depression, which were ascertained from administrative and depression screening data. Cox proportional hazards models were used to measure associations between incident depression and all-cause mortality, with race-by-depression interactions used to assess disparities. RESULTS: Overall, 10,013 veterans (24.5%) were diagnosed with depression after a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Incident depression was associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-1.32). African American veterans were more likely than White veterans to be diagnosed with depression (29.3% vs 23.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.21). Among those with depression, African Americans were less likely to be prescribed an antidepressant (30.4% vs 31.7%; aOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93). The hazard of all-cause mortality associated with depression was greater for African American veterans than White veterans (aHR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.26-1.38] vs 1.15 [95% CI, 1.07-1.24]; race-by-depression interaction P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Incident depression is common among prostate cancer survivors and is associated with higher mortality, particularly among African American men. Patient-centered strategies to manage incident depression may be critical to reducing disparities in prostate cancer outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Supervivientes de Cáncer , Depresión , Mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Negro o Afroamericano/psicología , Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Supervivientes de Cáncer/psicología , Supervivientes de Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Depresión/etnología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Mortalidad/etnología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/etnología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/psicología , Población Blanca/psicología , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
Policy Points With increasing integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning in medicine, there are concerns that algorithm inaccuracy could lead to patient injury and medical liability. While prior work has focused on medical malpractice, the artificial intelligence ecosystem consists of multiple stakeholders beyond clinicians. Current liability frameworks are inadequate to encourage both safe clinical implementation and disruptive innovation of artificial intelligence. Several policy options could ensure a more balanced liability system, including altering the standard of care, insurance, indemnification, special/no-fault adjudication systems, and regulation. Such liability frameworks could facilitate safe and expedient implementation of artificial intelligence and machine learning in clinical care.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Atención a la Salud/tendencias , Política de Salud , Responsabilidad Legal , Humanos , Innovación OrganizacionalRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To model Medicare Part B and patient savings associated with increased bevacizumab payment and use for intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy. DESIGN: Cost analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS®) Registry data. METHODS: Medicare claims and IRIS® Registry data were used to calculate Medicare Part B expenditures and patient copayments for anti-VEGF agents with increasing reimbursement and use of bevacizumab relative to ranibizumab and aflibercept. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medicare Part B costs and patient copayments for anti-VEGF agents in the Medicare fee-for-service population. RESULTS: Increasing bevacizumab reimbursement to $125.78, equalizing the dollar margin with aflibercept, would result in Medicare Part B savings of $468 million and patient savings of $119 million with a 10% increase in bevacizumab market share. CONCLUSIONS: Increased use of bevacizumab achievable with increased reimbursement to eliminate the financial disincentive to its use would result in substantial savings for the Medicare Part B program and for patients receiving anti-VEGF intravitreal injections.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis/economía , Ahorro de Costo/economía , Planes de Aranceles por Servicios/economía , Medicare Part B/economía , Bevacizumab/economía , Gastos en Salud , Inyecciones Intravítreas , Ranibizumab/economía , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/economía , Sistema de Registros , Estados Unidos , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/antagonistas & inhibidoresRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To characterize surgical confusions in ophthalmology to determine their incidence, root causes, and impact on patients and physicians. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of errors in ophthalmic surgical procedures between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2017. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred forty-three cases involving surgical confusions. METHODS: Cases were identified by the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company from closed case files and by the New York State Health Department from the New York Patient Occurrence Reporting and Tracking program that identified the surgical confusions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence and impact by intended surgery, error type, and root cause as well as preventability by the Universal Protocol. RESULTS: Of the 143 cases of surgical confusions identified, 92 cases (64.3%) were deemed preventable by the Universal Protocol. Approximately two thirds, 95 cases (66.4%), were cases of incorrect implants being used during cataract surgery (cataract extraction and intraocular lens implantation), of which 33 cases (34.7%) were not preventable by the Universal Protocol. Wrong eye blocks or anesthesia accounted for 20 cases (14.0%), incorrect eye procedures accounted for 10 cases (7.00%), incorrect refractive surgery measurements accounted for 6 cases (4.20%), incorrect patient or procedure accounted for 5 cases (3.50%), incorrect intraocular gas concentration accounted for 4 cases (2.80%), and incorrect medication in surgery accounted for 3 cases (2.10%). The most common root cause of confusion was an inadequately performed time out, which was responsible for nearly one third of all surgical confusions, 46 cases (32.2%). Incorrect lens orders or calculations before surgery (so-called upstream errors) were the second most common cause of surgical confusion, involving 31 cases (21.7%). The average legal indemnity for incorrect implant during cataract surgery was $57 514 (United States dollars). The average indemnity for incorrect refractive surgery measurement was $123 125, that for incorrect eye procedure was $50 000, and that for incorrect gas concentration was $220 844. CONCLUSIONS: Most surgical confusions could have been prevented by following the Universal Protocol properly. However, upstream errors, originating in the clinic or office before surgery, and ineffective communication during time outs suggest a need for modification of the Universal Protocol.
Asunto(s)
Errores Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Oftalmológicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Oftalmología/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Incidencia , Errores Médicos/prevención & control , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To identify temporal and geographic trends in private equity (PE)-backed acquisitions of ophthalmology and optometry practices in the United States. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study using private equity acquisition and investment data from January 1, 2012, through October 20, 2019. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 228 PE acquisitions of ophthalmology and optometry practices in the United States between 2012 and 2019. METHODS: Acquisition and financial investment data were compiled from 6 financial databases, 4 industry news outlets, and publicly available press releases from PE firms or platform companies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Yearly trends in ophthalmology and optometry acquisitions, including number of total acquisitions, clinical locations, and providers of acquired practices as well as subsequent sales, median holding period, geographic footprint, and financing status of each platform company. RESULTS: A total of 228 practices associated with 1466 clinical locations and 2146 ophthalmologists or optometrists were acquired by 29 PE-backed platform companies. Of these acquisitions, 127, 9, and 92 were comprehensive or multispecialty, retina, and optometry practices, respectively. Acquisitions increased rapidly between 2012 and 2019: 42 practices were acquired between 2012 and 2016 compared to 186 from 2017 through 2019. Financing rounds of platform companies paralleled temporal acquisition trends. Three platform companies, comprising 60% of platforms formed before 2016, were subsequently sold or recapitalized to new PE investors by the end of this study period with a median holding period of 3.5 years. In terms of geographic distribution, acquisitions occurred in 40 states with most PE firms developing multistate platform companies. New York and California were the 2 states with the greatest number of PE acquisitions with 22 and 19, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Private equity-backed acquisitions of ophthalmology and optometry practices have increased rapidly since 2012, with some platform companies having already been sold or recapitalized to new investors. Additionally, private equity-backed platform companies have developed both regionally focused and multistate models of add-on acquisitions. Future research should assess the impact of PE investment on patient, provider, and practice metrics, including health outcomes, expenditures, procedural volume, and staff employment.