Racial and Ethnic Differences in Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Testing Locations Among Medicaid-Insured Youth.

PURPOSE: Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhea (GC) infections are common among 15- to 24-year-olds, with Black and Hispanic youth disproportionately affected. Understanding where youth receive CT/GC testing is necessary to address disparities in CT/GC care. Our objective was to identify if differences exist in CT/GC testing locations by race and ethnicity. METHODS: We used 2019 MarketScan Medicaid data to examine CT/GC testing location by youth race and ethnicity. RESULTS: There were 418,623 CT/GC tests during the study period. Tests were most frequently ordered at medical offices for all races and ethnicities, although less frequently for Black (37.6%) and Hispanic (37.3%) than for White youth (49.3%). Black youth were frequently tested in emergency departments (19.6%), while Hispanic youth were frequently tested in Federally Qualified Health Centers (19.0%). DISCUSSION: We found significant racial and ethnic disparities in the location of CT/GC testing among Medicaid-insured-youth; these findings should be used to guide strategies that address inequities in CT/GC care.

Access to Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Clinical Trials in Underrepresented Populations: A Multicenter Cohort Study of Pediatric and Young Adult Acute Lymphobastic Leukemia Patients.

Chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy is a promising approach to improve survival for children and adults with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), but these clinical trials might not be equally accessible to patients of low socioeconomic status (SES) or to patients from racial or ethnic minority groups. We sought to describe the sociodemographic characteristics of pediatric and adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients enrolled in CAR-T clinical trials and to compare these characteristics to those of other patients with r/r B-ALL. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study at 5 pediatric consortium sites to compare the sociodemographic characteristics of patients treated and enrolled in CAR-T trials at their home institution, other patients with r/r B-ALL treated at these sites, and patients referred from an external hospital for CAR-T trials. The patients were age 0 to 27 years with r/r B-ALL treated at 1 of the consortium sites between 2012 and 2018. Clinical and demographic data were collected from the electronic health record. We calculated distance from home to treating institution and assigned SES scores based on census tract. Among the 337 patients treated for r/r B-ALL, 112 were referred from an external hospital to a consortium site and enrolled in a CAR-T trial and 225 were treated primarily at a consortium site, with 34% enrolled in a CAR-T trial. Patients treated primarily at a consortium site had similar characteristics regardless of trial enrollment. Lower proportions of Hispanic patients (37% versus 56%; P = .03), patients whose preferred language was Spanish (8% versus 22%; P = .006), and publicly insured patients (38% versus 65%; P = .001) were referred from an external hospital than were treated primarily at a consortium site and enrolled in a CAR-T trial. Patients who are Hispanic, Spanish-speaking, or publicly insured are underrepresented in referrals from external hospitals to CAR-T centers. External provider implicit bias also may influence referral of these patients. Establishing partnerships between CAR-T centers and external hospital sites may improve provider familiarity, patient referral, and patient access to CAR-T clinical trials.

Increasing Early Childhood Screening in Primary Care Through a Quality Improvement Collaborative.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple early childhood screenings are recommended, but gaps persist in implementation. Our aim for this project was to improve screening, discussion, referral, and follow-up of development, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), maternal depression, and social determinants of health (SDoH) to 90% by July 2018. METHODS: This 1-year national quality improvement collaborative involved 19 pediatric primary care practices. Supported by virtual and in-person learning opportunities, practice teams implemented changes to early childhood screening. Monthly chart reviews were used to assess screening, discussion, referral, and follow-up for development, ASD, maternal depression, and SDoH. Parent surveys were used to assess parent-reported screening and referral and/or resource provision. Practice self-ratings and team surveys were used to assess practice-level changes. RESULTS: Participating practices included independent, academic, hospital-affiliated, and multispecialty group practices and community health centers in 12 states. The collaborative met development and ASD screening goals of >90%. Largest increases in screening occurred for maternal depression (27% to 87%; +222%; P < .001) and SDoH (26% to 76%; +231%; P < .001). Statistically significant increases in discussion of results occurred for all screening areas. For referral, significant increases were seen for development (53% to 86%; P < .001) and maternal depression (23% to 100%; P = .008). Parents also reported increased screening and referral and/or resource provision. Practice-level changes included improved systems to support screening. CONCLUSIONS: Practices successfully implemented multiple screenings and demonstrated improvement in subsequent discussion, referral, and follow-up steps. Continued advocacy for adequate resources to support referral and follow-up is needed to translate increased screening into improved health outcomes.

End-of-Life Cancer Care Redesign: Patient and Caregiver Experiences in a Lay Health Worker-Led Intervention.

IMPORTANCE: The Engagement of Patients with Advanced Cancer (EPAC), comprised of a lay health worker (LHW) who assists patients with advance care planning, is an effective intervention for improving patient experiences and reducing acute care use and total health-care costs. The objective of this study was to assess patients' and caregivers' experiences with the intervention. METHODS: We invited all patients enrolled in EPAC and their caregivers to complete an 8-item survey at the end of the intervention and a random 35% sample to participate in a qualitative interview to assess their experiences. At 15-month follow-up, we invited all caregivers of patients who died during the study to participate in a qualitative interview. We analyzed survey responses using bivariate methods and recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were alive at completion of the intervention and all 30 identified caregivers completed the survey. All viewed the intervention as a critical part of cancer care and recommended the intervention for other patients. In qualitative interviews, among 30 patients, all reported improved comfort in discussing their end-of-life care preferences. In qualitative interviews with 24 bereaved caregivers, all viewed the intervention as critical in ensuring that their loved ones' wishes were adhered to at the end of life. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Incorporating an LHW into end-of-life cancer care is an approach supported and viewed as highly effective in improving care by patients and caregivers. The LHW-led EPAC intervention is one solution that can significantly impact patient and caregiver experiences.

A Community-Partnered, Evidence-Based Approach to Improving Cancer Care Delivery for Low-Income and Minority Patients with Cancer.

Community-engaged adaptations of evidence-based interventions are needed to improve cancer care delivery for low-income and minority populations with cancer. The objective of this study was to adapt an intervention to improve end-of-life cancer care delivery using a community-partnered approach. We used a two-step formative research process to adapt the evidence-based lay health workers educate engage and encourage patients to share (LEAPS) cancer care intervention. The first step involved obtaining a series of adaptations through focus groups with 15 patients, 12 caregivers, and 6 leaders and staff of the Unite Here Health (UHH) payer organization, and 12 primary care and oncology care providers. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. The second step involved finalization of adaptations from a community advisory board comprised of 4 patients, 2 caregivers, 4 oncology providers, 2 lay health workers and 4 UHH healthcare payer staff and executive leaders. Using this community-engaged approach, stakeholders identified critical barriers and solutions to intervention delivery which included: (1) expanding the intervention to ensure patient recruitment; (2) including caregivers; (3) regular communication between UHH staff, primary care and oncology providers; and (4) selecting outcomes that reflect patient-reported quality of life. This systematic and community-partnered approach to adapt an end-of-life cancer care intervention strengthened this existing intervention to promote the needs and preferences of patients, caregivers, providers, and healthcare payer leaders. This approach can be used to address cancer care delivery for low-income and minority patients with cancer.

Perspectives of Health Care Payer Organizations on Cancer Care Delivery Redesign: A National Study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite advancements in cancer care, persistent gaps remain in the delivery of high-value end-of-life cancer care. The aim of this study was to examine views of health care payer organization stakeholders on approaches to the redesign of end-of-life cancer care delivery strategies to improve care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 34 key stakeholders (eg, chief medical officers, medical directors) in 12 health plans and 22 medical group organizations across the United States. We recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews using the constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Participants endorsed strategies to redesign end-of-life cancer care delivery to improve end-of-life care. Participants supported the use of nonprofessionals to deliver some cancer services through alternative formats (eg, telephone, Internet) and delivery of services in nonclinical settings. Participants reported that using nonprofessional providers to offer some services, such as goals of care discussions and symptom assessments, via telephone in community-based settings or in patients' homes, may be more effective and efficient ways to deliver high-value cancer care services. Participants described challenges to redesign, including coordination with and acceptance by oncology providers and payment models required to financially support clinical changes. Some participants suggested solutions, including providing funding and logistic support to encourage implementation of care delivery innovations and to financially reward practices for delivery of high-value end-of-life cancer care services. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders from payer organizations endorsed opportunities to redesign cancer care delivery, and some are willing to provide logistic, design, and financial support to practices interested in improving end-of-life cancer care.

Delivering End-of-Life Cancer Care: Perspectives of Providers.

OBJECTIVES: Persistent gaps in end-of-life cancer care delivery and growing associated expenditures remain imminent US public health issues. The objective of this study was to understand clinical providers' experiences delivering cancer care for patients at the end of life and their perspectives on potential solutions to improve quality of care. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 75 cancer care providers across the United States. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Providers identified 3 major cancer care delivery challenges including lack of time to educate patients and caregivers due to clinical volume and administrative burdens, ambiguity in determining both prognosis and timing of palliative care at the end-of-life, and lack of adequate systems to support non-face-to-face communication with patients. To address these challenges, providers endorsed several options for clinical practice redesign in their settings. These include use of a lay health worker to assist in addressing early advance care planning, proactive non-face-to-face communication with patients specifically regarding symptom management, and community and in-home delivery of cancer care services. DISCUSSION: Specific strategies for cancer care redesign endorsed by health-care providers may be used to create interventions that can more efficiently and effectively address gaps in end-of-life cancer care.

Redesigning Cancer Care Delivery: Views From Patients and Caregivers.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer is a leading cause of death in the United States. Although treatments have improved, patients and caregivers continue to report significant gaps in their care. The objective of this study was to examine the views of patients and caregivers on their experiences with current cancer care delivery and identify key strategies to improve the delivery of care. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 75 patients and 45 caregivers across the United States. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported multiple gaps in care delivery, including barriers in health communication with health care providers, lack of elucidation of care goals, lack of care coordination, and challenges in accessing care. Participants identified that greater use of nonphysician providers and alternative formats, such as telephone-based care and home and community-based care, would narrow these gaps. CONCLUSION: Understanding patients' and caregivers' experiences with gaps in cancer care delivery can inform cancer care delivery redesign efforts and lead to targeted interventions that result in patient-centered and family-oriented care.

Mental Health Conditions and Medical and Surgical Hospital Utilization.

OBJECTIVE: Mental health conditions are prevalent among children hospitalized for medical conditions and surgical procedures, but little is known about their influence on hospital resource use. The objectives of this study were to examine how hospitalization characteristics vary by presence of a comorbid mental health condition and estimate the association of a comorbid mental health condition with hospital length of stay (LOS) and costs. METHODS: Using the 2012 Kids' Inpatient Database, we conducted a retrospective, nationally representative, cross-sectional study of 670 161 hospitalizations for 10 common medical and 10 common surgical conditions among 3- to 20-year-old patients. Associations between mental health conditions and hospital LOS were examined using adjusted generalized linear models. Costs of additional hospital days associated with mental health conditions were estimated using hospital cost-to-charge ratios. RESULTS: A comorbid mental health condition was present in 13.2% of hospitalizations. A comorbid mental health condition was associated with a LOS increase of 8.8% (from 2.5 to 2.7 days, P < .001) for medical hospitalizations and a 16.9% increase (from 3.6 to 4.2 days, P < .001) for surgical hospitalizations. For hospitalizations in this sample, comorbid mental health conditions were associated with an additional 31 729 (95% confidence interval: 29 085 to 33 492) hospital days and $90 million (95% confidence interval: $81 to $101 million) in hospital costs. CONCLUSIONS: Medical and surgical hospitalizations with comorbid mental health conditions were associated with longer hospital stay and higher hospital costs. Knowledge about the influence of mental health conditions on pediatric hospital utilization can inform clinical innovation and case-mix adjustment.

Parent-reported quality of preventive care for children at-risk for developmental delay.

OBJECTIVE: To compare preventive care quality for children at risk and not at risk for developmental, behavioral, or social delays. METHODS: Using the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health (n = 22,269), we used the Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) questionnaire to identify children ages 10 months to 5 years who were at risk for delays. We examined parent-reported quality measures to evaluate whether care was comprehensive, coordinated, family-centered, effective in providing developmental surveillance and screening, and provided within a medical home. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used. RESULTS: Twenty-eight percent of children were at-risk for delay, with 17% at moderate risk and 11% at high risk. Greater proportions of children at high, moderate, and no/low risk had a usual source of care (89%-96%) and a personal doctor/nurse (91%-94%); smaller proportions of children underwent a standardized developmental screening (16%-23%) and had parental developmental concerns elicited from their doctor (47%-48%). In adjusted analyses, moderate-risk and high-risk children were less likely than no/low-risk children to receive needed care coordination (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for high risk 0.33, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.24-0.46) and referrals (high risk AOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25-0.65), family-centered care (high-risk AOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36-0.62), and to have a medical home (high-risk AOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.32-0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings may reflect either poorer quality of care provided to at-risk children, or higher level of parental need that routine visits are not currently meeting. For at-risk children, enhanced screening and detection followed by targeted increases in communication and follow-up may help clinicians better anticipate families' needs.