Reducing Care Overuse in Older Patients Using Professional Norms and Accountability : A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective strategies are needed to curtail overuse that may lead to harm. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of clinician decision support redirecting attention to harms and engaging social and reputational concerns on overuse in older primary care patients. DESIGN: 18-month, single-blind, pragmatic, cluster randomized trial, constrained randomization. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04289753). SETTING: 60 primary care internal medicine, family medicine and geriatrics practices within a health system from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 371 primary care clinicians and their older adult patients from participating practices. INTERVENTION: Behavioral science-informed, point-of-care, clinical decision support tools plus brief case-based education addressing the 3 primary clinical outcomes (187 clinicians from 30 clinics) were compared with brief case-based education alone (187 clinicians from 30 clinics). Decision support was designed to increase salience of potential harms, convey social norms, and promote accountability. MEASUREMENTS: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in men aged 76 years and older without previous prostate cancer, urine testing for nonspecific reasons in women aged 65 years and older, and overtreatment of diabetes with hypoglycemic agents in patients aged 75 years and older and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) less than 7%. RESULTS: At randomization, mean clinic annual PSA testing, unspecified urine testing, and diabetes overtreatment rates were 24.9, 23.9, and 16.8 per 100 patients, respectively. After 18 months of intervention, the intervention group had lower adjusted difference-in-differences in annual rates of PSA testing (-8.7 [95% CI, -10.2 to -7.1]), unspecified urine testing (-5.5 [CI, -7.0 to -3.6]), and diabetes overtreatment (-1.4 [CI, -2.9 to -0.03]) compared with education only. Safety measures did not show increased emergency care related to urinary tract infections or hyperglycemia. An HbA1c greater than 9.0% was more common with the intervention among previously overtreated diabetes patients (adjusted difference-in-differences, 0.47 per 100 patients [95% CI, 0.04 to 1.20]). LIMITATION: A single health system limits generalizability; electronic health data limit ability to differentiate between overtesting and underdocumentation. CONCLUSION: Decision support designed to increase clinicians' attention to possible harms, social norms, and reputational concerns reduced unspecified testing compared with offering traditional case-based education alone. Small decreases in diabetes overtreatment may also result in higher rates of uncontrolled diabetes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Changes in the Appropriateness of US Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing After the COVID-19 Outbreak: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis of 2016-2021 Data.

BACKGROUND: No national study has evaluated changes in the appropriateness of US outpatient antibiotic prescribing across all conditions and age groups after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in March 2020. METHODS: This was an interrupted time series analysis of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database, a national commercial and Medicare Advantage claims database. Analyses included prescriptions for antibiotics dispensed to children and adults enrolled during each month during 2017-2021. For each prescription, we applied our previously developed antibiotic appropriateness classification scheme to International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes on medical claims occurring on or during the 3 days prior to dispensing. Outcomes included the monthly proportion of antibiotic prescriptions that were inappropriate and the monthly proportion of enrollees with ≥1 inappropriate prescription. Using segmented regression models, we assessed for level and slope changes in outcomes in March 2020. RESULTS: Analyses included 37 566 581 enrollees, of whom 19 154 059 (51.0%) were female. The proportion of enrollees with ≥1 inappropriate prescription decreased in March 2020 (level decrease: -0.80 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI}, -1.09% to -.51%]) and subsequently increased (slope increase: 0.02 percentage points per month [95% CI, .01%-.03%]), partly because overall antibiotic dispensing rebounded and partly because the proportion of antibiotic prescriptions that were inappropriate increased (slope increase: 0.11 percentage points per month [95% CI, .04%-.18%]). In December 2021, the proportion of enrollees with ≥1 inappropriate prescription equaled the corresponding proportion in December 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an initial decline, the proportion of enrollees exposed to inappropriate antibiotics returned to baseline levels by December 2021. Findings underscore the continued importance of outpatient antibiotic stewardship initiatives.

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.

Use of Telehealth Information for Early Detection: Insights From the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objectives. To examine whether the addition of telehealth data to existing surveillance infrastructure can improve forecasts of cases and mortality. Methods. In this observational study, we compared accuracy of 14-day forecasts using real-time data available to the National Syndromic Surveillance Program (standard forecasts) to forecasts that also included telehealth information (telehealth forecasts). The study was performed in a national telehealth service provider in 2020 serving 50 US states and the District of Columbia. Results. Among 10.5 million telemedicine encounters, 169 672 probable COVID-19 cases were diagnosed by 5050 clinicians, with a rate between 0.79 and 47.8 probable cases per 100 000 encounters per day (mean = 8.37; SD = 10.75). Publicly reported case counts ranged from 0.5 to 237 916 (mean: 53 913; SD = 47 466) and 0 to 2328 deaths (mean = 1035; SD = 550) per day. Telehealth-based forecasts improved 14-day case forecasting accuracy by 1.8 percentage points to 30.9% (P = .06) and mortality forecasting by 6.4 percentage points to 26.9% (P < .048). Conclusions. Modest improvements in forecasting can be gained from adding telehealth data to syndromic surveillance infrastructure. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(2):218-225. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307499).

Patient Perspectives on the Drivers and Deterrents of Antibiotic Treatment of Acute Rhinosinusitis: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are prescribed in >80% of outpatient acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) visits, despite the low incidence of bacterial infection. Previous studies have shown patient expectations are the most robust predictor of antibiotics prescription in ARS. However, patient perceptions are not well known or understood. OBJECTIVE: To understand patient perceptions regarding what drives or deters them from wanting, seeking, and taking antibiotic treatment of ARS. DESIGN: Iterative thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Nineteen adults diagnosed with ARS within the prior 60 days at the Northwestern Medicine General Internal Medicine clinic in Chicago, IL. MAIN MEASURES: Perceptions of patients with ARS. KEY RESULTS: We interviewed 19 patients, identifying the following drivers of antibiotic use: (1) symptoms, especially discolored rhinorrhea, and seeking relief, (2) belief that antibiotics are a convenient and/or effective way to relieve/cure sinusitis, and (3) desire for tangible outcomes of a clinic visit. For deterrents, the following themes emerged: (1) concern about antibiotic resistance, (2) preference for other treatments or preference to avoid medications, and (3) desire to avoid a healthcare visit. Patients identified that a trustworthy physician's recommendation for antibiotics was a driver, and a recommendation against antibiotics was a deterrent to taking antibiotics; a delayed antibiotic prescription also served as a deterrent. Antibiotic side effects were viewed neutrally by most participants, though they were a deterrent to some. CONCLUSIONS: Patients have misconceptions about the indications and effectiveness of antibiotics for ARS. Intimate knowledge of key antibiotic drivers and deterrents, from the perspective of patients with ARS, can be leveraged to engage and increase patients' knowledge, and set appropriate expectations for antibiotics for ARS.

Association of Primary Care Physician Compensation Incentives and Quality of Care in the United States, 2012-2016.

BACKGROUND: Physician compensation incentives may have positive or negative effects on clinical quality. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between various physician compensation incentives on technical indicators of primary care quality. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, nationally representative retrospective analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Visits by adults to primary care physicians in the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2012-2016. We analyzed 49,580 sampled visits, representing 1.45 billion primary care visits. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed the association between 5 compensation incentives - quality measure performance, patient experience scores, individual productivity, practice financial performance, or practice efficiency - and 10 high-value and 7 low-value care measures as well as high-value and low-value care composites. KEY RESULTS: Quality measure performance was an incentive in 22% of visits; patient experience scores, 17%; individual productivity, 57%; practice financial performance, 63%; and practice efficiency, 12%. In adjusted models, none of the compensation incentives were consistently associated with individual high- and low-value measures. None of the compensation incentives were associated with high- or low-value care composites. For example, quality measure performance compensation was not significantly associated with high-value care (visits with quality incentive, 47% of eligible measures met; without quality incentive, 43%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.15) or low-value care (aOR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.82-1.19). Physician compensation incentives that might be expected to increase low-value care did not: patient experience (aOR for low-value care composite, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65-1.05), individual productivity (aOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.22), and practice financial performance (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81-1.36). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective, cross-sectional, nationally representative analysis of care in the United States, physician compensation incentives were not generally associated with more or less high- or low-value care.

Latent Class Analysis of Prescribing Behavior of Primary Care Physicians in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines, opioids, proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), and antibiotics are frequently prescribed inappropriately by primary care physicians (PCPs), without sufficient consideration of alternative options or adverse effects. We hypothesized that distinct groups of PCPs could be identified based on their propensity to prescribe these medications. OBJECTIVE: To identify PCP groups based on their propensity to prescribe benzodiazepines, opioids, PPIs, and antibiotics, and patient and PCP characteristics associated with identified prescribing patterns. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using VA data and latent class regression analyses to identify prescribing patterns among PCPs and examine the association of patient and PCP characteristics with class membership. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2524 full-time PCPs and their patient panels (n = 2,939,636 patients), from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018. MAIN MEASURES: We categorized PCPs based on prescribing volume quartiles for the four drug classes, based on total days' supply dispensed of each medication by the PCP to their patients (expressed as days' supply per 1000 panel patient-days). We used latent class analysis to group PCPs based on prescribing and used multinomial logistic regression to examine patient and PCP characteristics associated with latent class membership. KEY RESULTS: PCPs were categorized into four groups (latent classes): low intensity (23% of cohort), medium-intensity overall/high-intensity PPI (36%), medium-intensity overall/high-intensity opioid (20%), and high intensity (21%). PCPs in the high-intensity group were predominantly in the highest quartile of prescribers for all four drugs (68% in the highest quartile for benzodiazepine, 86% opioids, 64% PPIs, 62% antibiotics). High-intensity PCPs (vs. low intensity) were substantially less likely to be female (OR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.21-0.42) or practice in the northeast versus other census regions (OR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.06-0.17). CONCLUSIONS: VA PCPs can be classified into four clearly differentiated groups based on their prescribing of benzodiazepines, opioids, PPIs, and antibiotics, suggesting an underlying typology of prescribing. High-intensity PCPs were more likely to be male.

A Scoping Review on the Concept of Physician Caring.

BACKGROUND: Physicians' interest in the health and well-being of their patients is a tenet of medical practice. Physicians' ability to act upon this interest by caring for and about their patients is central to high-quality clinical medicine and may affect burnout. To date, a strong theoretical and empirical understanding of physician caring does not exist. To establish a practical, evidence-based approach to improve health care delivery and potentially address physician burnout, we sought to identify and synthesize existing conceptual models, frameworks, and definitions of physician caring. METHODS: We performed a scoping review on physician caring. In November 2019 and September 2020, we searched PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials to identify conceptual models, frameworks, and definitions of physician caring. Eligible articles involved discussion or study of care or caring among medical practitioners. We created a content summary and performed thematic analysis of extracted data. RESULTS: Of 11,776 articles, we reviewed the full text of 297 articles; 61 articles met inclusion criteria. Commonly identified concepts referenced Peabody's "secret of care" and the ethics of care. In bioethics, caring is described as a virtue. Contradictions exist among concepts of caring, such as whether caring is an attitude, emotion, or behavior, and the role of relationship development. Thematic analysis of all concepts and definitions identified six aspects of physician caring: (1) relational aspects, (2) technical aspects, (3) physician attitudes and characteristics, (4) agency, (5) reciprocity, and (6) physician self-care. DISCUSSION: Caring is instrumental to clinical medicine. However, scientific understanding of what constitutes caring from physicians is limited by contradictions across concepts. A unifying concept of physician caring does not yet exist. This review proposes six aspects of physician caring which can be used to develop evidence-based approaches to improve health care delivery and potentially mitigate physician burnout.

Development of High-Risk Geriatric Polypharmacy Electronic Clinical Quality Measures and a Pilot Test of EHR Nudges Based on These Measures.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate polypharmacy, prevalent among older patients, is associated with substantial harms. OBJECTIVE: To develop measures of high-risk polypharmacy and pilot test novel electronic health record (EHR)-based nudges grounded in behavioral science to promote deprescribing. DESIGN: We developed and validated seven measures, then conducted a three-arm pilot from February to May 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Validation used data from 78,880 patients from a single large health system. Six physicians were pre-pilot test environment users. Sixty-nine physicians participated in the pilot. MAIN MEASURES: Rate of high-risk polypharmacy among patients aged 65 years or older. High-risk polypharmacy was defined as being prescribed ≥5 medications and satisfying ≥1 of the following high-risk criteria: drugs that increase fall risk among patients with fall history; drug-drug interactions that increase fall risk; thiazolidinedione, NSAID, or non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker in heart failure; and glyburide, glimepiride, or NSAID in chronic kidney disease. INTERVENTIONS: Physicians received EHR alerts when renewing or prescribing certain high-risk medications when criteria were met. One practice received a "commitment nudge" that offered a chance to commit to addressing high-risk polypharmacy at the next visit. One practice received a "justification nudge" that asked for a reason when high-risk polypharmacy was present. One practice received both. KEY RESULTS: Among 55,107 patients 65 and older prescribed 5 or more medications, 6256 (7.9%) had one or more high-risk criteria. During the pilot, the mean (SD) number of nudges per physician per week was 1.7 (0.4) for commitment, 0.8 (0.5) for justification, and 1.9 (0.5) for both interventions. Physicians requested to be reminded to address high-risk polypharmacy for 236/833 (28.3%) of the commitment nudges and acknowledged 441 of 460 (95.9%) of justification nudges, providing a text response for 187 (40.7%). CONCLUSIONS: EHR-based measures and nudges addressing high-risk polypharmacy were feasible to develop and implement, and warrant further testing.

Effect of Peer Benchmarking on Specialist Electronic Consult Performance in a Los Angeles Safety-Net: a Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Since the advent of COVID-19, accelerated adoption of systems that reduce face-to-face encounters has outpaced training and best practices. Electronic consultations (eConsults), structured communications between PCPs and specialists regarding a case, have been effective in reducing face-to-face specialist encounters. As the health system rapidly adapts to multiple new practices and communication tools, new mechanisms to measure and improve performance in this context are needed. OBJECTIVE: To test whether feedback comparing physicians to top performing peers using co-specialists' ratings improves performance. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Eighty facility-specialty clusters and 214 clinicians INTERVENTION: Providers in the feedback arms were sent messages that announced their membership in an elite group of "Top Performers" or provided actionable recommendations with feedback for providers that were "Not Top Performers." MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes were changes in peer ratings in the following performance dimensions after feedback was received: (1) elicitation of information from primary care practitioners; (2) adherence to institutional clinical guidelines; (3) agreement with peer's medical decision-making; (4) educational value; (5) relationship building. KEY RESULTS: Specialists showed significant improvements on 3 of the 5 consultation performance dimensions: medical decision-making (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.14, p<.05), educational value (1.86, 1.17-2.96) and relationship building (1.63, 1.13-2.35) (both p<.01). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has shed light on clinicians' commitment to professionalism and service as we rapidly adapt to changing paradigms. Interventions that appeal to professional norms can help improve the efficacy of new systems of practice. We show that specialists' performance can be measured and improved with feedback using aspirational norms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03784950.

Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescribing for Acute Sinusitis in Primary Care: A Cross-sectional Study.

The proportion of sinusitis visits that meet antibiotic prescribing criteria is unknown. Of 425 randomly selected sinusitis visits, 50% (214) met antibiotic prescribing criteria. There was no significant difference in antibiotic prescribing at visits that did (205/214 [96%]) and did not (193/211 [92%]; P = .07) meet antibiotic prescribing criteria.

Examining primary care physician rationale for not following geriatric choosing wisely recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The objective is to understand why physicians order tests or treatments in older adults contrary to published recommendations. METHODS: Participants: Physicians above the median for ≥ 1 measures of overuse representing 3 Choosing Wisely topics. MEASUREMENTS: Participants evaluated decisions in a semi-structured interview regarding: 1) Screening men aged ≥ 76 with prostate specific antigen 2) Ordering urine studies in women ≥ 65 without symptoms 3) Overtreating adults aged ≥ 75 with insulin or oral hypoglycemic medications. Two investigators independently coded transcripts using qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Nineteen interviews were conducted across the three topics resulting in four themes. First, physicians were aware and knowledgeable of guidelines. Second, perceived patient preference towards overuse influenced physician action even when physicians felt strongly that testing was not indicated. Third, physicians overestimated benefits of a test and underemphasized potential harms. Fourth, physicians were resistant to change when patients appeared to be doing well. CONCLUSIONS: Though physicians expressed awareness to avoid overuse, deference to patient preferences and the tendency to distort the chance of benefit over harm influenced decisions to order testing. Approaches for decreasing unnecessary testing must account for perceived patient preferences, make the potential harms of overtesting salient, and address clinical inertia among patients who appear to be doing well.

Awareness, Attitudes, and Actions Related to COVID-19 Among Adults With Chronic Conditions at the Onset of the U.S. Outbreak: A Cross-sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: The evolving outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is requiring social distancing and other measures to protect public health. However, messaging has been inconsistent and unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine COVID-19 awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and related behaviors among U.S. adults who are more vulnerable to complications of infection because of age and comorbid conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey linked to 3 active clinical trials and 1 cohort study. SETTING: 5 academic internal medicine practices and 2 federally qualified health centers. PATIENTS: 630 adults aged 23 to 88 years living with 1 or more chronic conditions. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A fourth (24.6%) of participants were "very worried" about getting the coronavirus. Nearly a third could not correctly identify symptoms (28.3%) or ways to prevent infection (30.2%). One in 4 adults (24.6%) believed that they were "not at all likely" to get the virus, and 21.9% reported that COVID-19 had little or no effect on their daily routine. One in 10 respondents was very confident that the federal government could prevent a nationwide outbreak. In multivariable analyses, participants who were black, were living below the poverty level, and had low health literacy were more likely to be less worried about COVID-19, to not believe that they would become infected, and to feel less prepared for an outbreak. Those with low health literacy had greater confidence in the federal government response. LIMITATION: Cross-sectional study of adults with underlying health conditions in 1 city during the initial week of the COVID-19 U.S. outbreak. CONCLUSION: Many adults with comorbid conditions lacked critical knowledge about COVID-19 and, despite concern, were not changing routines or plans. Noted disparities suggest that greater public health efforts may be needed to mobilize the most vulnerable communities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

General Health Checks in Adult Primary Care: A Review.

Importance: General health checks, also known as general medical examinations, periodic health evaluations, checkups, routine visits, or wellness visits, are commonly performed in adult primary care to identify and prevent disease. Although general health checks are often expected and advocated by patients, clinicians, insurers, and health systems, others question their value. Observations: Randomized trials and observational studies with control groups reported in prior systematic reviews and an updated literature review through March 2021 were included. Among 19 randomized trials (906 to 59 616 participants; follow-up, 1 to 30 years), 5 evaluated a single general health check, 7 evaluated annual health checks, 1 evaluated biannual checks, and 6 evaluated health checks delivered at other frequencies. Twelve of 13 observational studies (240 to 471 415 participants; follow-up, cross-sectional to 5 years) evaluated a single general health check. General health checks were generally not associated with decreased mortality, cardiovascular events, or cardiovascular disease incidence. For example, in the South-East London Screening Study (n = 7229), adults aged 40 to 64 years who were invited to 2 health checks over 2 years, compared with adults not invited to screening, experienced no 8-year mortality benefit (6% vs 5%). General health checks were associated with increased detection of chronic diseases, such as depression and hypertension; moderate improvements in controlling risk factors, such as blood pressure and cholesterol; increased clinical preventive service uptake, such as colorectal and cervical cancer screening; and improvements in patient-reported outcomes, such as quality of life and self-rated health. In the Danish Check-In Study (n = 1104), more patients randomized to receive to a single health check, compared with those randomized to receive usual care, received a new antidepressant prescription over 1 year (5% vs 2%; P = .007). In a propensity score-matched analysis (n = 8917), a higher percentage of patients who attended a Medicare Annual Wellness Visit, compared with those who did not, underwent colorectal cancer screening (69% vs 60%; P < .01). General health checks were sometimes associated with modest improvements in health behaviors such as physical activity and diet. In the OXCHECK trial (n = 4121), fewer patients randomized to receive annual health checks, compared with those not randomized to receive health checks, exercised less than once per month (68% vs 71%; difference, 3.3% [95% CI, 0.5%-6.1%]). Potential adverse effects in individual studies included an increased risk of stroke and increased mortality attributed to increased completion of advance directives. Conclusions and Relevance: General health checks were not associated with reduced mortality or cardiovascular events, but were associated with increased chronic disease recognition and treatment, risk factor control, preventive service uptake, and improved patient-reported outcomes. Primary care teams may reasonably offer general health checks, especially for groups at high risk of overdue preventive services, uncontrolled risk factors, low self-rated health, or poor connection or inadequate access to primary care.

Clinician-Level Variation in Three Measures Representing Overuse Based on the American Geriatrics Society Choosing Wisely Statement.

IMPORTANCE: The extent of clinician-level variation in the overuse of testing or treatment in older adults is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To examine clinician-level variation for three new measures of potentially inappropriate use of medical services in older adults. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of overall means and clinician-level variation in performance on three new measures. SUBJECTS: Adults aged 65 years and older who had office visits with outpatient primary or immediate care clinicians within a single academic medical center health system between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017. MEASURES: Two electronic clinical quality measures representing potentially inappropriate use of medical services in older adults: prostate-specific antigen testing against guidelines (PSA) in men aged 76 and older; urinalysis or urine culture for non-specific reasons in women aged 65 and older; and one intermediate outcome measure: hemoglobin A1c less than 7.0 in adults aged 75 and older with diabetes mellitus treated with insulin or oral hypoglycemic medication. RESULTS: Sixty-nine clinicians and 2009 patients contributed observations to the PSA measure, 144 clinicians and 5933 patients contributed to the urinalysis/urine culture measure, and 42 clinicians and 665 patients contributed to the diabetes measure. Meaningful clinician-level performance variation was greatest for the PSA measure (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.27), followed by the urinalysis/urine culture measure (ICC = 0.18), and the diabetes measure (ICC = 0.024). The range of possible overuse across clinician quartiles was 8-54% for the PSA measure, 3-35% for the urinalysis/urine culture measure, and 13-49% for the diabetes measure. The odds ratios of overuse in the highest quartile compared with the lowest for the PSA, urinalysis/urine culture, and diabetes measures were 99.3 (95% CI 43 to 228), 15.7 (10 to 24), and 6.0 (3.3 to 11), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Within the same health system, rates of potential overuse in elderly patients varied greatly across clinicians, particularly for the process measures examined.

Changes in COVID-19 Knowledge, Beliefs, Behaviors, and Preparedness Among High-Risk Adults from the Onset to the Acceleration Phase of the US Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: The US outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) accelerated rapidly over a short time to become a public health crisis. OBJECTIVE: To assess how high-risk adults' COVID-19 knowledge, beliefs, behaviors, and sense of preparedness changed from the onset of the US outbreak (March 13-20, 2020) to the acceleration phase (March 27-April 7, 2020). DESIGN: Longitudinal, two-wave telephone survey. PARTICIPANTS: 588 predominately older adults with ≥ 1 chronic condition recruited from 4 active, federally funded studies in Chicago. MAIN MEASURES: Self-reported knowledge of COVID-19 symptoms and prevention, related beliefs, behaviors, and sense of preparedness. KEY RESULTS: From the onset to the acceleration phase, participants increasingly perceived COVID-19 to be a serious public health threat, reported more changes to their daily routine and plans, and reported greater preparedness. The proportion of respondents who believed they were "not at all likely" to get the virus decreased slightly (24.9 to 22.4%; p = 0.04), but there was no significant change in the proportion of those who were unable to accurately identify ways to prevent infection (29.2 to 25.7%; p 0.14). In multivariable analyses, black adults and those with lower health literacy were more likely to report less perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 (black adults: relative risk (RR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.44, p = 0.02; marginal health literacy: RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.26-3.07, p < 0.01). Individuals with low health literacy remained more likely to feel unprepared for the outbreak (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.11-2.92, p = 0.02) and to express confidence in the federal government response (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.49-3.00, p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: Adults at higher risk for COVID-19 continue to lack critical knowledge about prevention. While participants reported greater changes to daily routines and plans, disparities continued to exist in perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 and in preparedness. Public health messaging to date may not be effectively reaching vulnerable communities.

The inconvincible patient: how clinicians perceive demand for antibiotics in the outpatient setting.

BACKGROUND: Perceived patient demand for antibiotics drives unnecessary antibiotic prescribing in outpatient settings, but little is known about how clinicians experience this demand or how this perceived demand shapes their decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To identify how clinicians perceive patient demand for antibiotics and the way these perceptions stimulate unnecessary prescribing. METHODS: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with clinicians in outpatient settings who prescribe antibiotics. Interviews were analyzed using conventional and directed content analysis. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 25 clinicians from nine practices across three states. Patient demand was the most common reason respondents provided for why they prescribed non-indicated antibiotics. Three related factors motivated clinically unnecessary antibiotic use in the face of perceived patient demand: (i) clinicians want their patients to regard clinical visits as valuable and believe that an antibiotic prescription demonstrates value; (ii) clinicians want to avoid negative repercussions of denying antibiotics, including reduced income, damage to their reputation, emotional exhaustion, and degraded relationships with patients; (iii) clinicians believed that certain patients are impossible to satisfy without an antibiotic prescription and felt that efforts to refuse antibiotics to such patients wastes time and invites the aforementioned negative repercussions. Clinicians in urgent care settings were especially likely to describe being motivated by these factors. CONCLUSION: Interventions to improve antibiotic use in the outpatient setting must address clinicians' concerns about providing value for their patients, fear of negative repercussions from denying antibiotics, and the approach to inconvincible patients.

Overactive bladder in an integrated delivery system: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Overactive bladder (OAB) is common and morbid. Medication and diagnosis claims may be specific, but lack sensitivity to identify patients with overactive bladder. We used an "electronic health record (EHR) phenotype" to identify cases and describe treatment choices and anticholinergic burden for OAB. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a large, integrated health delivery system between July 2011 and June 2012 (2-year follow-up). We examined care from primary care and specialty clinics, medication and procedure use, and anticholinergic burden for each patient. RESULTS: There were 7362 patients with an EHR OAB phenotype; 50% of patients were > 65 years old, 74% were female, and 83% were white. The distribution of care included primary care physician (PCP)/specialty co-management (25% of patients); PCP care only (18%); urology only (13%); or some other combination of specialty care (33%). Only 40% of patients were prescribed at least 1 OAB medication during the study. The mean duration of prescribed medication was 1.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 to 1.6 months; range, < 1 month to 24 months). Independent predictors of receipt of an OAB medication included increasing age (odds ratio [OR], 1.4 for every 10 years; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.5), women (OR, 1.6 compared with men; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.8), diabetes (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5), and certain sources of care compared with PCP-only care: PCP/specialty co-management (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.0), urology (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.8 to 2.6), and multiple specialists (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Very few patients received other treatments: biofeedback (< 1%), onabotulinumtoxinA (2%), or sacral nerve stimulation (1%). Patients who received OAB medications had significantly higher anticholinergic burden than patients who did not (anticholinergic total standardized daily dose, 125 versus 46; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although OAB is common and morbid, in a longitudinal study using an EHR OAB phenotype 40% of patients were treated with OAB medication and only briefly.

Does probiotic consumption reduce antibiotic utilization for common acute infections? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Overall reduction of antibiotic use is a widely adopted public health goal. Given evidence that consuming probiotics reduce the incidence, duration and/or severity of certain types of common acute infections, we hypothesized that probiotics are associated with reduced antibiotic use. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the impact of probiotic supplementation (any strain, dose or duration), compared to placebo, on antibiotic utilization for common, acute infections in otherwise healthy people of all ages. METHODS: We searched 13 electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL from inception to 17th January 2017. Backward and forward citation searches were also conducted. Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for individual studies using criteria adapted from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and the quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the GRADE system. Studies that evaluated similar outcomes were pooled statistically in meta-analyses using a random-effects model. RESULTS: We screened 1533 citations, and of these, 17 RCTs met our predefined inclusion criteria. All 17 were conducted in infants and/or children with a primary aim of preventing acute respiratory tract infections, acute lower digestive tract infections or acute otitis media. Included studies used 13 probiotic formulations, all comprising single or combination Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium delivered in a range of food or supplement products. Mean duration of probiotic supplementation ranged from 4 days to 9 months. Trial quality was variable. Meta-analysis demonstrated that infants and children who received probiotics to prevent acute illnesses had a lower risk of being prescribed antibiotics, relative to those who received placebo (Pooled Relative Risk = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.94). When restricted to five studies with a low risk of bias, the pooled relative risk was 0.46 (95% CI: 0.23-0.97). Significant statistical heterogeneity was present in effect size estimates, which appeared to be due to one trial which could partly be considered as an outlier. CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics, provided to reduce the risk for common acute infections, may be associated with reduced antibiotic use in infants and children. Additional well-designed studies are needed to substantiate these findings in children and explore similar findings in other population groups.

Characteristics and Disparities among Primary Care Practices in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite new incentives for US primary care, concerns abound that patient-centered practice capabilities are lagging. OBJECTIVE: Describe the practice structure, patient-centered capabilities, and payment relationships of US primary care practices; identify disparities in practice capabilities. DESIGN: Analysis of the 2015 Medical Organizations Survey (MOS), part of the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). SETTING: Practice-reported information from primary care practices of MEPS respondents who reported receiving primary care and made at least one visit in 2015 to that practice. PARTICIPANTS: Surveyed primary care practices (n = 4318; 77% response rate) providing primary care to 7161 individuals, representing 101,159,263 Americans. MAIN MEASURES: Practice structure (ownership and personnel); practice capabilities (certification as a patient-centered medical home [PCMH], electronic health record [EHR] use, and x-ray capability); and payment orientation (accountable care organization [ACO] and capitation). KEY RESULTS: Independently owned practices served 55% of patients, hospital-owned practices served 19%, and nonprofit/government/academic-owned served 20%. Solo practices served 25% of patients and practices with 2-10 physicians served 53% of patients. Forty-one percent of patients were served by practices certified as PCMHs. Practices with EHRs cared for 90% of patients and could exchange secure messages with 78% of patients. Practices with in-office x-ray capability cared for 34% of patients. Practices participating in ACOs and capitation served 44% and 46% of patients, respectively. Primary care patients in the South, compared to the rest of the country, had less access to nearly all practice capabilities, including patient care coordination (adjusted difference, 13% [95% CI, 8-18]) and secure EHR messaging (adjusted difference, 6% [95% CI, 1-10]). Uninsured patients were less likely to be served at a practice that used an EHR (adjusted difference, 9% [95% CI, 2-16]). CONCLUSIONS: Participants' primary care practices were mostly independently owned, nearly always used EHRs (albeit of varying capability), and frequently participated in innovative payment arrangements for a portion of their patients. Patient practices in the South had fewer capabilities than the rest of the country.