An Analysis of Trainee Status of the Primary Care Physician and Ambulatory Care Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Prior studies report disparities in outcomes for patients cared for by trainees versus faculty physicians at academic medical centers. This study examined the effect of having a trainee as the primary care physician versus a faculty member on routine population health outcomes after adjusting for differences in social determinants of health and primary care retention. METHOD: This cohort study assessed 38,404 patients receiving primary care at an academic hospital-affiliated practice by 60 faculty and 110 internal medicine trainees during academic year 2019. The effect of primary care practitioner trainee status on routine ambulatory care metrics was modeled using log-binomial regression with generalized estimating equation methods to account for physician-level clustering. Risk estimates before and after adjusting for social determinants of health and loss to follow-up are presented. RESULTS: Trainee and faculty cohorts had similar distributions of acute illness burden; however, patients in the trainee cohort were significantly more likely to identify as a race other than White (2,476 [52.6%] vs 14,785 [38.5%], P < .001), live in a zip code associated with poverty (1,688 [35.9%] vs 9,122 [23.8%], P < .001), use public health insurance (1,021 [21.7%] vs 6,108 [15.9%], P < .001), and have limited English proficiency (1,415 [30.1%] vs 5,203 [13.6%], P < .001). In adjusted analyses, trainee status of primary care physician was not associated with lack of breast cancer screening but was associated with missed opportunities to screen for colorectal cancer (relative risk [RR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.88), control type 2 diabetes mellitus (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.94), and control hypertension (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physician trainee status was associated with poorer quality of care in the ambulatory setting after adjusting for differences in socioeconomic factors and loss to follow-up, highlighting a potential ambulatory training gap.

Financial Conflicts of Interest Change After a High-Impact Clinical Trial Publication in Oncology.

PURPOSE: Because financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) may potentially influence patient care, hospital drug formularies, and treatment guidelines, it is important that these are disclosed. The purpose of this observational study was to quantify the changes in FCOI among U.S.-based academic authors in industry-sponsored oncology trials after a high-impact publication. METHODS: A list of all U.S.-based academic authors (authors) of industry-sponsored solid tumor clinical trials published between August 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015, in 6 high-impact journals (New England Journal of Medicine, Nature, Science, Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, and Cancer Discovery) was assembled. Studies were limited to solid tumor oncology trials. After all authors were identified, direct and research funding was tabulated from CMS Open Payments for the year prior (Ypre) and the first 3 years following publication (Y1, Y2, Y3) in the high-impact journal. Summary statistics were tabulated and repeated-measures linear mixed-effects regression models were fit to examine changes after publication. RESULTS: A total of 102 publications with a total of 620 authors were identified. No FCOI was declared by 11, 12, 21, and 24 authors in Ypre, Y1, Y2, and Y3, respectively. In Ypre, Y1, Y2, and Y3: median FCOI for direct payments was $16,702 (range: $0-$3,180,356), $20,830 (range: $0-$3,180,356), $22,031 (range: $0-$920,746), and $21,356 (range: $0-$920,707), respectively; while median research funding was $559,202 (range: $0-$19,973,818), $505,031 (range $0-$19,920,452), $502,726 (range: $0-$15,729,776), and $497,342 (range: $0-$43,036,716), respectively. There were nonsignificant increases in total direct payments and total direct payments received from the sponsor (P>0.0125 for both) and statistically significant decreases in total associated research funding and total research funding from the research sponsor in Y1, Y2, and Y3 as compared to Ypre (P<0.0001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: After publication of an industry-sponsored solid tumor clinical trial in a high-impact journal, authors had statistically significant decreases in research funding FCOI in the first 3 years postpublication compared to the year prior.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Team-Based Integrative Medicine Approach to the Treatment of Back Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To report the results of health economic analyses comparing two treatment approaches for chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: Observational prospective cohort study comparing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CLBP care provided at an integrative care clinic with that provided in other clinics within the same hospital. CLBP-related medical utilization, function, quality of life, and days of work incapacity were self-reported at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. SETTINGS/LOCATION: Osher Clinical Center (OCC) based at a tertiary academic hospital (Brigham and Women's Hospital [BWH]) and other clinics at BWH. SUBJECTS: CLBP patients seeking care at OCC or non-OCC BWH clinics. INTERVENTIONS: Integrative or conventional care for CLBP as prescribed by the treating clinician(s). OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated per treatment approach based on the SF-12. Cost per QALY gained was evaluated using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). ICERs based on CLBP-specific effectiveness measures (Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ] and bothersomeness of pain [BOP]) were exploratory outcomes. RESULTS: Total adjusted annual CLBP-related costs per patient were greater in the OCC versus non-OCC group ($11,526.73 vs. $6,810.63). Between group differences in QALYs were small and ICER estimate of cost per QALY gained was high ($436,676). However, unadjusted mean direct costs per patient decreased over time in the OCC group. Savings in direct costs of $391 (95% confidence interval: -1,078 to 1,861) were observed in the OCC group for the 6- to 12-month period, driven primarily by reduced medication usage. ICERs based on adjusted RDQ and BOP group differences showed cost of $2,073 and $4,203 for a one-point reduction per respective scale. CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for baseline differences, self-reported costs were higher in the OCC group with only small effects on QALYs. However, trends toward decreased direct expenditures and medication usage over time warrant further investigation. Future studies evaluating potential benefits of integrative care models for the management of CLBP should employ randomized designs, longer observational periods, and explore multiple metrics of cost-effectiveness.

Discordant financial conflicts of interest disclosures between clinical trial conference abstract and subsequent publication.

BACKGROUND: Financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) are known to be prevalent in medicine. Authorship of pivotal trials reap non-financial benefits including publication productivity that can be used for assessment of tenure positions and promotion. The purpose of this investigation was to quantify the prevalence and discordance of academic trial author (authors) FCOI in industry-sponsored drug trials that were initially presented as oral abstracts and subsequently resulted in a peer-reviewed publication. METHODS: Oral abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2017 Annual Meeting that were subsequently published were identified. Studies that were non-industry sponsored, non-adult, or non-therapeutic trials were excluded. Studies that did not have a subsequent peer-reviewed publication or had a publication preceding the ASCO 2017 Annual Meeting were also excluded. FCOI was categorized and impact factor (IF) for the journal at the time of publication was retrieved. FCOI discordance between the oral abstract and publication was calculated based on geographic location and IF. RESULTS: A total of 22 paired abstract and publications met inclusion criteria for further analysis. A total of 384 authors were identified, of these 280 authors (74.1%) were included in both the oral abstract and subsequent publication. A total of 76% of these 280 authors had FCOI and 66.4% had FCOI discordance. There were statistically significant differences for the sum of FCOI discordance for U.S.-based authors (p = 0.0004) but not for journal IF. When analyzing the sum of absolute differences of FCOI discordance, statistical significance was reached for authors from any of the three geographic regions, as well as, low and high IF journals (all p-values < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study draws attention to the lack of uniformity and vetting of FCOI reporting in abstracts and journals publishing solid tumor oncology trial results. This is particularly concerning, since FCOI is prevalent globally.

Complexity of preoperative blood pressure dynamics: possible utility in cardiac surgical risk assessment.

Complexity measures are intended to assess the cardiovascular system's capacity to respond to stressors. We sought to determine if decreased BP complexity is associated with increased estimated risk as obtained from two standard instruments: the Society of Thoracic Surgeons' (STS) Risk of Mortality and Morbidity Index and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation Score (EuroSCORE II). In this observational cohort study, preoperative systolic, diastolic, mean (MAP) and pulse pressure (PP) time series were derived in 147 patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The complexity of the fluctuations of these four variables was quantified using multiscale entropy (MSE) analysis. In addition, the traditional time series measures, mean and standard deviation (SD) were also computed. The relationships between time series measures and the risk indices (after logarithmic transformation) were then assessed using nonparametric (Spearman correlation, rs) and linear regression methods. A one standard deviation change in the complexity of systolic, diastolic and MAP time series was negatively associated (p < 0.05) with the STS and EuroSCORE indices in both unadjusted (21-34%) and models adjusted for age, gender and SD of the BP time series (15-31%). The mean and SD of BP time series were not significantly associated with the risk index except for a positive association with the SD of the diastolic BP. Lower preoperative BP complexity was associated with a higher estimated risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes and may provide a novel approach to assessing cardiovascular risk. Future studies are needed to determine whether dynamical risk indices can improve current risk prediction tools.

Preventability of Early Versus Late Hospital Readmissions in a National Cohort of General Medicine Patients.

Background: Many experts believe that hospitals with more frequent readmissions provide lower-quality care, but little is known about how the preventability of readmissions might change over the postdischarge time frame. Objective: To determine whether readmissions within 7 days of discharge differ from those between 8 and 30 days after discharge with respect to preventability. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: 10 academic medical centers in the United States. Patients: 822 adults readmitted to a general medicine service. Measurements: For each readmission, 2 site-specific physician adjudicators used a structured survey instrument to determine whether it was preventable and measured other characteristics. Results: Overall, 36.2% of early readmissions versus 23.0% of late readmissions were preventable (median risk difference, 13.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 5.5 to 26.4 percentage points]). Hospitals were identified as better locations for preventing early readmissions (47.2% vs. 25.5%; median risk difference, 22.8 percentage points [interquartile range, 17.9 to 31.8 percentage points]), whereas outpatient clinics (15.2% vs. 6.6%; median risk difference, 10.0 percentage points [interquartile range, 4.6 to 12.2 percentage points]) and home (19.4% vs. 14.0%; median risk difference, 5.6 percentage points [interquartile range, -6.1 to 17.1 percentage points]) were better for preventing late readmissions. Limitation: Physician adjudicators were not blinded to readmission timing, community hospitals were not included in the study, and readmissions to nonstudy hospitals were not included in the results. Conclusion: Early readmissions were more likely to be preventable and amenable to hospital-based interventions. Late readmissions were less likely to be preventable and were more amenable to ambulatory and home-based interventions. Primary Funding Source: Association of American Medical Colleges.

Association of Primary Care Practice Location and Ownership With the Provision of Low-Value Care in the United States.

Importance: Hospital-employed physicians provide primary care within the hospital or within community-based office practices. Yet, little is understood regarding the influence of hospital location and ownership on the delivery of low-value care. Objective: To assess the association of hospital location and hospital ownership with the provision of low-value health services. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study compared low-value service use after primary care visits at hospital-based outpatient practices from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2011, vs community-based office practices and at hospital-owned vs physician-owned community-based office practices from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2013. Logistic regression models adjusted for patient and health care professional characteristics and year, and weighted results were used to reflect population estimates. Results were also stratified by symptom acuity and whether a generalist physician (eg, general internist or family practitioner) was the patient's primary care provider. This study used nationally representative data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2013) and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2011) on outpatient visits to generalist physicians. Participants were patients seen with 3 common primary care conditions, namely, upper respiratory tract infection, back pain, and headache. Main Outcomes and Measures: The use of antibiotics (for upper respiratory tract infection), computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (for back pain and headache), radiographs (for upper respiratory tract infection and back pain), and specialty referrals (for all 3 conditions). Results: This study identified 31 162 visits for upper respiratory tract infection, back pain, and headache, representing an estimated 739 million US primary care visits from 1997 to 2013. Compared with visits with community-based physicians, patients in visits to hospital-based physicians were younger (mean age, 44.5 vs 49.1 years; P < .001) and less frequently saw their primary care provider (52.7% vs 81.9%, P < .001). Although antibiotic use was similar in both settings, hospital-based visits had more orders for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (8.3% vs 6.3%, P = .01), radiographs (12.8% vs 9.9%, P < .001), and specialty referrals (19.0% vs 7.6%, P < .001) than community-based visits. Multivariable adjustment and symptom acuity stratification revealed similar findings. Visits with a generalist other than the patient's primary care provider were associated with greater provision of low-value care but mainly within hospital-based settings. Practice patterns were similar among hospital-owned vs physician-owned community-based practices with the exception of specialty referrals, which were more frequent in hospital-owned community-based practices. Conclusions and Relevance: Visits to US hospital-based practices are associated with greater use of low-value computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, radiographs, and specialty referrals than visits to community-based practices, and visits to hospital-owned community-based practices had more specialty referrals than visits to physician-owned community-based practices. These findings raise concerns about the provision of low-value care at hospital-associated primary care practices.

Predicting Mortality up to 14 Years Among Community-Dwelling Adults Aged 65 and Older.

OBJECTIVES: Extended validation of an index predicting mortality among community-dwelling US older adults. DESIGN/SETTING: Examination of the performance of a previously developed index in predicting 10- and 14-year mortality among respondents to the 1997-2000 National Health Interview Surveys (NHIS) using the original development and validation cohorts. Follow-up mortality data are now available through 2011. PARTICIPANTS: 16,063 respondents from the original development cohort and 8,027 respondents from the original validation cohort. All participants were community dwelling and ≥65 years old. MEASUREMENTS: We calculated risk scores for each respondent based on the presence or absence of 11 factors (function, illnesses, behaviors, demographics) that make up the index. Using the Kaplan Meier method, we computed 10- and 14-year mortality estimates for the development and validation cohorts to examine model calibration. We examined model discrimination using the c-index. RESULTS: Participants in the development and validation cohorts were similar. Participants with risk scores 0-4 had 23% risk of 14-year mortality whereas respondents with risk scores (13+) had 89% risk of 14-year mortality. The c-index of the model in both cohorts was 0.73 for predicting 10-year mortality and 0.72 for predicting 14-year mortality. Overall, 18.4% of adults 65-74 years and 60.2% of adults ≥75 years have >50% risk of mortality in 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our index demonstrated excellent calibration and discrimination in predicting 10- and 14-year mortality among community-dwelling US adults ≥65 years. Information on long-term prognosis is needed to help clinicians and older adults make more informed person-centered medical decisions and to help older adults plan for the future.

Comparing Use of Low-Value Health Care Services Among U.S. Advanced Practice Clinicians and Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Many physicians believe that advanced practice clinicians (APCs [nurse practitioners and physician assistants]) provide care of relatively lower value. OBJECTIVE: To compare use of low-value services among U.S. APCs and physicians. DESIGN: Service use after primary care visits was evaluated for 3 conditions after adjustment for patient and provider characteristics and year. Patients with guideline-based red flags were excluded and analyses stratified by office- versus hospital-based visits, acute versus nonacute presentations, and whether clinicians self-identified as the patient's primary care provider (PCP). SETTING: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), 1997 to 2011. PATIENTS: Patients presenting with upper respiratory infections (URIs), back pain, or headache. MEASUREMENTS: Use of guideline-discordant antibiotics (for URIs), radiography (for URIs and back pain), computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (for headache and back pain), and referrals to other physicians (for all 3 conditions). RESULTS: 12 170 physician and 473 APC office-based visits and 13 359 physician and 2947 APC hospital-based visits were identified. Although office-based clinicians saw similar patients, hospital-based APCs saw younger patients (mean age, 42.6 vs. 45.0 years; P < 0.001), and practiced in urban settings less frequently (49.7% vs. 81.7% of visits; P < 0.001) than hospital-based physicians. Unadjusted and adjusted results revealed that APCs ordered antibiotics, CT or MRI, radiography, and referrals as often as physicians in both settings. Stratification suggested that self-identified PCP APCs ordered more services than PCP physicians in the hospital-based setting. LIMITATION: NHAMCS reflects hospital-based APC care; NAMCS samples physician practices and likely underrepresents office-based APCs. CONCLUSION: APCs and physicians provided an equivalent amount of low-value health services, dispelling physicians' perceptions that APCs provide lower-value care than physicians for these common conditions. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Health Services and Research Administration, Ryoichi Sasakawa Fellowship Fund, and National Institutes of Health.

Utility of Emergency Department Use of Abdominal Pelvic Computed Tomography in the Management of Crohn's Disease.

GOAL: The primary aim of this study was to determine predictors of clinically significant computed tomography (CT) scans, paying particular attention to findings of previous CT scans. BACKGROUND: Use of CT to assess patients with Crohn's disease (CD) in the Emergency Department (ED) is both costly and exposes patients to high levels of ionizing radiation while not clearly improving outcomes. STUDY: Patients with CD who underwent CT scan in the Emergency Department from 2008 to 2011 at a tertiary referral center were assessed for clinically significant findings. A multivariable generalized estimating equation model with logit link and exchangeable working correlation structure was constructed to assess for independent predictors of CT scans with clinically significant findings. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients with CD underwent 194 CT scans. Ninety-two of 194 (47%) CT scans demonstrated clinically significant findings. Predictors of clinically significant CT scans included ileal disease involvement [odds ratios (OR) 3.47, P=0.01] and white blood cell count >12 (OR 2.1, P=0.03). Most notably, patients with a CT scan without clinically significant findings performed in the preceding month were significantly less likely to have a clinically significant CT scan (OR 0.23, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CD who had a CT scan without significant findings the month prior are unlikely to have clinically significant CT findings. Ileal disease and an elevated white blood cell are predictive of clinically significant CT scans.

The Use of Traditional Vietnamese Medicine Among Vietnamese Immigrants Attending an Urban Community Health Center in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about Traditional Vietnamese Medicine (TVM) and its use among Vietnamese immigrants in the United States. This study aimed to characterize TVM and improve understanding of its use among Vietnamese outpatients attending an urban clinic. METHODS: This cross-sectional observation study was performed by mailing bilingual surveys to a stratified random sample of 400 Vietnamese adult patients (≥18 years of age) who had visited a community health center in Boston, Massachusetts, at least once in the prior 12 months. The data were analyzed by using descriptive and multivariable regression statistics. The use of TVM and the factors influencing their use were reported. RESULTS: Among the 216 respondents, 68% reported using TVM. Of those users, the median age was 56 years and 68% were female, 51% had lived in the United States for less than 13 years, and 91% spoke English "not well or not at all." Among the 89% who reported using TVM of indigenous origin, 62% used "wind scraping," 35% used herbal pills/products, and 30% used "wind snatching." Sixty-one percent used therapies of foreign origin; of those, 51% used Asian-originated TVM (herbs, 25%; Eastern massage, 23%) and 38% used Western-influenced TVM (diet supplements, 28%; Western massage, 8%). TVM was mostly used for pain conditions (57%), "staying well" (38%), and cough/colds (27%). Forty-five percent ignored the question on revealing TVM use to providers; of those who answered, 57% said "no." Fifty-one percent of TVM users reported using Western medicine for the same problem, while 46% used TVM and Western medicine within 2 days of each other. Self-rated health (odds ratio [OR], 2.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-5.06), household size (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.04-4.22), and education (OR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.03-6.80) were associated with TVM use. CONCLUSION: TVM is an important component of the healthcare of urban Vietnamese and needs to be further investigated. Healthcare providers need to encourage open discussion to better care for this population.

Performance of the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool Among Women Age 75 Years and Older.

BACKGROUND: The Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT, "Gail model") is commonly used for breast cancer prediction; however, it has not been validated for women age 75 years and older. METHODS: We used Nurses' Health Study (NHS) data beginning in 2004 and Women's Health Initiative (WHI) data beginning in 2005 to compare BCRAT's performance among women age 75 years and older with that in women age 55 to 74 years in predicting five-year breast cancer incidence. BCRAT risk factors include: age, race/ethnicity, age at menarche, age at first birth, family history, history of benign breast biopsy, and atypia. We examined BCRAT's calibration by age by comparing expected/observed (E/O) ratios of breast cancer incidence. We examined discrimination by computing c-statistics for the model by age. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Seventy-three thousand seventy-two NHS and 97 081 WHI women participated. NHS participants were more likely to be non-Hispanic white (96.2% vs 84.7% in WHI, P < .001) and were less likely to develop breast cancer (1.8% vs 2.0%, P = .02). E/O ratios by age in NHS were 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09 to 1.23, age 57-74 years) and 1.31 (95% CI = 1.18 to 1.45, age ≥ 75 years, P = .02), and in WHI 1.03 (95% CI = 0.97 to 1.09, age 55-74 years) and 1.10 (95% CI = 1.00 to 1.21, age ≥ 75 years, P = .21). E/O ratio 95% confidence intervals crossed one among women age 75 years and older when samples were limited to women who underwent mammography and were without significant illness. C-statistics ranged between 0.56 and 0.58 in both cohorts regardless of age. CONCLUSIONS: BCRAT accurately predicted breast cancer for women age 75 years and older who underwent mammography and were without significant illness but had modest discrimination. Models that consider individual competing risks of non-breast cancer death may improve breast cancer risk prediction for older women.

Neuropsychiatric symptoms and expenditure on complementary and alternative medicine.

OBJECTIVE: Neuropsychiatric symptoms affect 37% of US adults. These symptoms are often refractory to standard therapies, and patients may consequently opt for complementary and alternative medicine therapies (CAM). We sought to determine the demand for CAM by those with neuropsychiatric symptoms compared to those without neuropsychiatric symptoms as measured by out-of-pocket expenditure. METHOD: We compared CAM expenditure between US adults with and without neuropsychiatric symptoms (n = 23,393) using the 2007 National Health Interview Survey. Symptoms included depression, anxiety, insomnia, attention deficits, headaches, excessive sleepiness, and memory loss. CAM was defined per guidelines from the National Institutes of Health as mind-body therapies, biological therapies, manipulation therapies, or alternative medical systems. Expenditure on CAM by those without neuropsychiatric symptoms was compared to those with neuropsychiatric symptoms. RESULTS: Of the adults surveyed, 37% had ≥ 1 neuropsychiatric symptom and spent $14.8 billion out-of-pocket on CAM. Those with ≥ 1 neuropsychiatric symptom were more likely than those without neuropsychiatric symptoms to spend on CAM (27.4% vs 20.3%, P < .001). Likelihood to spend on CAM increased with number of symptoms (27.2% with ≥ 3 symptoms, P < .001). After adjustment was made for confounders using logistic regression, those with ≥ 1 neuropsychiatric symptom remained more likely to spend on CAM (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.22-1.48), and the likelihood increased to 1.55 (95% CI, 1.34-1.79) for ≥ 3 symptoms. Anxiety (OR = 1.40 [95% CI, 1.22-1.60]) and excessive sleepiness (OR = 1.36 [95% CI, 1.21-1.54]) were the most closely associated with CAM expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: Those with ≥ 1 neuropsychiatric symptom had disproportionately higher demand for CAM than those without symptoms. Research regarding safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of CAM is limited; therefore, future research should evaluate these issues given the tremendous demand for these treatments.

Differences between early and late readmissions among patients: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Early and late readmissions may have different causal factors, requiring different prevention strategies. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether predictors of readmission change within 30 days after discharge. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2010. MEASUREMENTS: Factors related to the index hospitalization (acute illness burden, inpatient care process factors, and clinical indicators of instability at discharge) and unrelated factors (chronic illness burden and social determinants of health) and how they affect early readmissions (0 to 7 days after discharge) and late readmissions (8 to 30 days after discharge). RESULTS: 13 334 admissions, representing 8078 patients, were included in the analysis. Early readmissions were associated with markers of acute illness burden, including length of hospital stay (odds ratio [OR], 1.02 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.03]) and whether a rapid response team was called for assessment (OR, 1.48 [CI, 1.15 to 1.89]); markers of chronic illness burden, including receiving a medication indicating organ failure (OR, 1.19 [CI, 1.02 to 1.40]); and social determinants of health, including barriers to learning (OR, 1.18 [CI, 1.01 to 1.38]). Early readmissions were less likely if a patient was discharged between 8:00 a.m. and 12:59 p.m. (OR, 0.76 [CI, 0.58 to 0.99]). Late readmissions were associated with markers of chronic illness burden, including receiving a medication indicating organ failure (OR, 1.24 [CI, 1.08 to 1.41]) or hemodialysis (OR, 1.61 [CI, 1.12 to 2.17]), and social determinants of health, including barriers to learning (OR, 1.24 [CI, 1.09 to 1.42]) and having unsupplemented Medicare or Medicaid (OR, 1.16 [CI, 1.01 to 1.33]). LIMITATION: Readmissions were ascertained at 1 institution. CONCLUSION: The time frame of 30 days after hospital discharge may not be homogeneous. Causal factors and readmission prevention strategies may differ for the early versus late periods. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Health Resources and Services Administration, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Harvard Catalyst, and Harvard University.

Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use Among Women During Pregnancy and Childbearing Years.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known regarding complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use during pregnancy and the preconception period. Since half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended, understanding the patterns of CAM use among women of childbearing age has implications for fetal and maternal health. METHODS: Descriptive statistics were generated from the 2012 National Health Interview Study (NHIS) to estimate weighted prevalence and patterns of CAM use by women of childbearing age. Comparisons were made between pregnant and nonpregnant respondents. RESULTS: In this sample of 10,002 women, 7 percent (n = 727) were recently pregnant. Over one-third of all the women used CAM during the previous year (34/38%, pregnant/nonpregnant, respectively) and only half disclosed CAM use to conventional providers (50/49%). In the adjusted model, taking multivitamins (OR 2.52 [CI 2.22-2.86]) and moderate to heavy alcohol use (OR 1.92 [CI 1.53-2.41]) were more likely associated with CAM use. The two most commonly used modalities were herbs (14/17%) and yoga (13/16%). The top reasons for CAM use were to improve general wellness or to prevent disease (33/35%) and to treat back pain (16/18%). When examining all pregnancy-related symptoms treated with CAM, no difference was found in the rates of CAM use between pregnant and nonpregnant users. CONCLUSIONS: CAM use by women of childbearing age in the United States is common, with over a third of the population using one or more therapies. However, only half disclosed their use to conventional providers despite limited evidence on safety and effectiveness. This study highlights the important need for further research in this area.

Sex, race, and consideration of bariatric surgery among primary care patients with moderate to severe obesity.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is one of few obesity treatments to produce substantial weight loss but only a small proportion of medically-eligible patients, especially men and racial minorities, undergo bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVE: To describe primary care patients' consideration of bariatric surgery, potential variation by sex and race, and factors that underlie any variation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Telephone interview of 337 patients with a body mass index or BMI > 35 kg/m(2) seen at four diverse primary care practices in Greater-Boston. MEASUREMENTS: Patients' consideration of bariatric surgery. RESULTS: Of 325 patients who had heard of bariatric surgery, 34 % had seriously considered surgery. Men were less likely than women and African Americans were less likely than Caucasian patients to have considered surgery after adjustment for sociodemographics and BMI. Comorbid conditions did not explain sex and racial differences but racial differences dissipated after adjustment for quality of life (QOL), which tended to be higher among African American than Caucasian patients. Physician recommendation of bariatric surgery was independently associated with serious consideration for surgery [OR 4.95 (95 % CI 2.81-8.70)], but did not explain variation in consideration of surgery across sex and race. However, if recommended by their doctor, men were as willing and African American and Hispanic patients were more willing to consider bariatric surgery than their respective counterparts after adjustment. Nevertheless, only 20 % of patients reported being recommended bariatric surgery by their doctor and African Americans and men were less likely to receive this recommendation; racial differences in being recommended surgery were also largely explained by differences in QOL. High perceived risk to bariatric surgery was the most commonly cited barrier; financial concerns were uncommonly cited. LIMITATIONS: Single geographic region; examined consideration and not who eventually proceeded with bariatric surgery. CONCLUSION: African Americans and men were less likely to have considered bariatric surgery and were less likely to have been recommended surgery by their doctors. Differences in how obesity affects QOL appear to account for some of these variations. High perceived risk rather than financial barrier was the major deterrent for patients.

Factors associated with pain among ambulatory patients with cancer with advanced disease at a comprehensive cancer center.

PURPOSE: The prevalence and severity of pain have not been well described among oncology patients in ambulatory care. To better understand the burden of pain among patients with advanced cancer, we examined the prevalence of pain reported during office and treatment visits. METHODS: A retrospective study of 4,014 patients with advanced disease (stage 4 at diagnosis or metastatic progression) who completed an ambulatory visit between 2004 and 2006 was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in Boston, Massachusetts. RESULTS: At their first visit during the study period, 74% of patients reported no pain (0 score); 12%, low pain (1 to 3 score); 9%, moderate pain (4 to 6 score); and 5%, severe pain (7 to 10 score). The prevalence of pain was highest among patients who were younger than 60 years of age, were nonwhite, did not speak English as their primary language, or were covered by Medicaid, received free care, or paid their own health care costs. Patients with thoracic, breast, and head and neck cancers had higher pain scores than those with other diseases. Pain was reported more frequently among patients whose diagnosis or metastatic progression occurred less than 3 months before the reported pain score. In multivariable regression analysis, age, race, cancer type, and time since diagnosis/progression were identified as important factors associated with severe pain. CONCLUSION: Younger age, minority race, and recent onset of advanced disease are associated with severe pain among patients with cancer. Recognizing these high-risk groups could inform targeted interventions to address pain care in ambulatory patients with advanced cancer.

Reviewing imaging examination results with a radiologist immediately after study completion: patient preferences and assessment of feasibility in an academic department.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess patient preferences about receiving radiology results and reviewing the images and findings directly with a radiologist after completion of an examination. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A prospective survey of English-speaking outpatients undergoing either nononcologic CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis or nonobstetric ultrasound examinations was completed between December 2010 and June 2011. Responses to survey items such as preferences regarding communication of results, knowledge of a radiologist, and anxiety level before and after radiologist-patient consultation were recorded. The average wait time between the end of the imaging examination and the consultation and the duration of consultation were documented. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients (43 men, 43 women; mean age, 52 years) underwent 37 CT and 49 ultrasound examinations). Forty-eight patients (56%) identified a radiologist as a physician who interprets images. Before imaging, 70 patients (81%) preferred hearing results from both the ordering provider and the radiologist. This percentage increased to 78 (91%) after consultation (p=0.03). Before consultation, 84 of the 86 patients (98%) indicated they would be comfortable hearing normal results or abnormal results from the person interpreting the examination; the number increased to 85 (99%) after consultation. Eighty-five patients (99%) agreed or strongly agreed that reviewing their examination findings with a radiologist was helpful. Eighty-four patients (98%) indicated they wanted the option of reviewing or always wanted to review future examination findings with a radiologist. After consultation, anxiety decreased in 41 patients (48%), increased in 13 (15%), and was unchanged in 32 (37%) (p=0.0001). The average wait for consultation and the duration of consultation were 9.9 and 10.4 minutes for CT and 1.2 and 7.1 minutes for ultrasound. CONCLUSION: Patients prefer hearing examination results from both their ordering provider and the interpreting radiologist. Most patients find radiologist consultation beneficial. Patients are comfortable hearing results from the radiologist, with most displaying decreased anxiety after consultation.