Fall risk assessment through a synergistic multi-source DNN learning model.

Falls are a complex problem and play a leading role in the development of disabilities in the older population. While fall detection systems are important, it is also essential to work on fall preventive strategies, which will have the most significant impact in reducing disability in the elderly. In this work, we explore a prospective cohort study, specifically designed for examining novel risk factors for falls in community-living older adults. Various types of data were acquired that are common for real-world applications. Learning from multiple data sources often leads to more valuable findings than any of the data sources can provide alone. However, simply merging features from disparate datasets usually will not produce a synergy effect. Hence, it becomes crucial to properly manage the synergy, complementarity, and conflicts that arise in multi-source learning. In this work, we propose a multi-source learning approach called the Synergy LSTM model, which exploits complementarity among textual fall descriptions together with people's physical characteristics. We further use the learned complementarities to evaluate fall risk factors present in the data. Experiment results show that our Synergy LSTM model can significantly improve classification performance and capture meaningful relations between data from multiple sources.

Frontline healthcare workers' mental distress, top concerns, and assessment on hierarchy of controls in response to COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: The existing studies showed that frontline healthcare workers during an epidemic experienced unusual stressors and mental distress which even lasted for years after the crisis. It is important to learn about their concerns early to mitigate the negative impact as well as to evaluate disease control from experiences on the front lines for improving responses to the outbreak. The study aimed to provide insights on how to strengthen public health responses to protect healthcare workers both physically and mentally, and effectively control the disease in light of hierarchy of controls. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed online via Qualtrics to frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 through a university's nursing program and received 267 valid responses from 103 certificated nursing assistants, 125 nurses, and 39 other health professionals. A descriptive data analysis with a Chi-square test at a two-sided 0.05 level of significance was performed on factors that potentially affected mental health of healthcare workers and effectiveness of disease control at workplace in five domains. The themes were summarized on open-ended questions. RESULTS: About 30% of the respondents showed the symptom of depression and needed a further investigation. The influencing factors in five domains were examined. Engineering and administrative controls, as well as PPE were widely used in response to COVID-19. The respondents assessed the state and workplace responses to COVID-19 better than the federal government responses. The workplace responses were considered most effective. Multiple factors with a statistically significant correlation with effectiveness of the disease control at workplace were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggested that timely responses at policy level will be more effective than other measures in early prevention and control of the pandemic, mental distress should be addressed in addition to PPE, and nursing programs should consider providing a situation-specific career coaching or counseling for students. A longitudinal study at a larger scale is warranted to capture the variation of time change with the disease control evolvement and across geographic regions.

Patients Evaluate Visit Notes Written by Their Clinicians: a Mixed Methods Investigation.

BACKGROUND: Patients actively involved in their care demonstrate better health outcomes. Using secure internet portals, clinicians are increasingly offering patients access to their narrative visit notes (open notes), but we know little about their understanding of notes written by clinicians. OBJECTIVE: We examined patients' views on the clarity, accuracy, and thoroughness of notes, their suggestions for improvement, and associations between their perceptions and willingness to recommend clinicians to others. DESIGN: We conducted an online survey of patients in 3 large health systems, June-October 2017. We performed a mixed methods analysis of survey responses regarding a self-selected note. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents were 21,664 patients aged 18 years or older who had read at least 1 open note in the previous 12 months. MAIN MEASURES: We asked to what degree the patient recalled understanding the note, whether it described the visit accurately, whether anything important was missing, for suggestions to improve the note, and whether they would recommend the authoring clinician to others. KEY RESULTS: Nearly all patients (96%) reported they understood all or nearly all of the self-selected note, with few differences by clinician type or specialty. Overall, 93% agreed or somewhat agreed the note accurately described the visit, and 6% reported something important missing from the note. The most common suggestions for improvement related to structure and content, jargon, and accuracy. Patients who reported understanding only some or very little of the note, or found inaccuracies or omissions, were much less likely to recommend the clinician to family and friends. CONCLUSIONS: Patients overwhelmingly report understanding their visit notes and usually find them accurate, with few disparities according to sociodemographic or health characteristics. They have many suggestions for improving their quality, and if they understand a note poorly or find inaccuracies, they often have less confidence in their clinicians.

Frequency and Types of Patient-Reported Errors in Electronic Health Record Ambulatory Care Notes.

Importance: As health information transparency increases, patients more often seek their health data. More than 44 million patients in the US can now readily access their ambulatory visit notes online, and the practice is increasing abroad. Few studies have assessed documentation errors that patients identify in their notes and how these may inform patient engagement and safety strategies. Objective: To assess the frequency and types of errors identified by patients who read open ambulatory visit notes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this survey study, a total of 136 815 patients at 3 US health care organizations with open notes, including 79 academic and community ambulatory care practices, received invitations to an online survey from June 5 to October 20, 2017. Patients who had at least 1 ambulatory note and had logged onto the portal at least once in the past 12 months were included. Data analysis was performed from July 3, 2018, to April 27, 2020. Exposures: Access to ambulatory care open notes through patient portals for up to 7 years (2010-2017). Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of patients reporting a mistake and how serious they perceived the mistake to be, factors associated with finding errors characterized by patients as serious, and categories of patient-reported errors. Results: Of 136 815 patients who received survey invitations, 29 656 (21.7%) responded and 22 889 patients (mean [SD] age, 55.16 [15.96] years; 14 447 [63.1%] female; 18 301 [80.0%] white) read 1 or more notes in the past 12 months and completed error questions. Of these patients, 4830 (21.1%) reported a perceived mistake and 2043 (42.3%) reported that the mistake was serious (somewhat serious: 1563 [32.4%]; very serious: 480 [9.9%]). In multivariable analysis, female patients (relative risk [RR], 1.79; 95% CI, 1.72-1.85), more educated patients (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.29-1.48), sicker patients (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.84-1.94), those aged 45 to 64 years (RR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.06-2.42), those 65 years or older (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.73-2.32), and those who read more than 1 note (2-3 notes: RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.34-2.47; ≥4 notes: RR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.02-4.73) were more likely to report a mistake that they found to be serious compared with their reference groups. After categorization of patient-reported very serious mistakes, those specifically mentioning the word diagnosis or describing a specific error in current or past diagnoses were most common (98 of 356 [27.5%]), followed by inaccurate medical history (85 of 356 [23.9%]), medications or allergies (50 of 356 [14.0%]), and tests, procedures, or results (30 of 356 [8.4%]). A total of 23 (6.5%) reflected notes reportedly written on the wrong patient. Of 433 very serious errors, 255 (58.9%) included at least 1 perceived error potentially associated with the diagnostic process (eg, history, physical examination, tests, referrals, and communication). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patients who read ambulatory notes online perceived mistakes, a substantial proportion of which they found to be serious. Older and sicker patients were twice as likely to report a serious error compared with younger and healthier patients, indicating important safety and quality implications. Sharing notes with patients may help engage them to improve record accuracy and health care safety together with practitioners.

Cost-effectiveness of the non-laboratory based Framingham algorithm in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A simulated analysis of a cohort of African American adults.

The non-lab Framingham algorithm, which substitute body mass index for lipids in the laboratory based (lab-based) Framingham algorithm, has been validated among African Americans (AAs). However, its cost-effectiveness and economic tradeoffs have not been evaluated. This study examines the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of two cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention programs guided by the non-lab versus lab-based Framingham algorithm. We simulated the World Health Organization CVD prevention guidelines on a cohort of 2690 AA participants in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) cohort. Costs were estimated using Medicare fee schedules (diagnostic tests, drugs & visits), Bureau of Labor Statistics (RN wages), and estimates for managing incident CVD events. Outcomes were assumed to be true positive cases detected at a data driven treatment threshold. Both algorithms had the best balance of sensitivity/specificity at the moderate risk threshold (>10% risk). Over 12years, 82% and 77% of 401 incident CVD events were accurately predicted via the non-lab and lab-based Framingham algorithms, respectively. There were 20 fewer false negative cases in the non-lab approach translating into over $900,000 in savings over 12years. The ICER was -$57,153 for every extra CVD event prevented when using the non-lab algorithm. The approach guided by the non-lab Framingham strategy dominated the lab-based approach with respect to both costs and predictive ability. Consequently, the non-lab Framingham algorithm could potentially provide a highly effective screening tool at lower cost to address the high burden of CVD especially among AA and in resource-constrained settings where lab tests are unavailable.

Validation of the nonlaboratory-based Framingham cardiovascular disease risk assessment algorithm in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities dataset.

BACKGROUND: Nonlaboratory-based (non-LB) algorithms have been developed to facilitate absolute cardiovascular risk assessment in resource-constrained settings. The non-LB Framingham algorithm, which substitute BMI for lipids in laboratory-based Framingham, exhibits best performance among non-LB algorithms. However, its external validity has not been evaluated. AIM: To examine the validity of non-LB Framingham algorithm in Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities dataset, and contrast performance with the laboratory-based Framingham algorithm. METHODS: We developed Cox regression models including non-LB and laboratory-based Framingham covariates in Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities dataset. Discrimination was assessed via C-statistic, calibration via goodness-of-fit, and marginal discrimination value of BMI vis-à-vis lipids vis-à-vis waist-hip ratio via net reclassification improvement (NRI). Both models were compared via area under receiver operating characteristic. RESULTS: Among 11 601 participants (mean age 54 years, 55% women, 23% black), non-LB vs. laboratory-based Framingham performed as follows: C-statistic 0.75 vs. 0.76 among women and 0.67 vs. 0.68 among men; goodness-of-fit 14.2 vs. 10.5 among women and 25.8 vs. 21.8 among men. Overall area under receiver operating characteristic was 0.706 vs. 0.710, respectively, with no racial differences in discrimination or calibration. BMI and total cholesterol had no impact on NRI. Incremental predictive value of HDL was comparable with waist-hip ratio (category-less NRI = 0.34 vs. 0.31; categorical NRI = 0.06 vs. 0.05, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the validity and limitations of the non-LB Framingham algorithm in a biracial cohort. Substituting BMI with a central adiposity metric such as waist-hip ratio or waist circumference could make the algorithm better or at par with the laboratory-based Framingham algorithm.

Physical Activity Domains/Recommendations and Leukocyte Telomere Length in U.S. Adults.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between different physical activity (PA) domains, PA recommendations, and leukocyte telomere length (LTL) using data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999-2002. METHODS: A total of 6933 U.S. adults (3402 men, 3531 women; age range: 20-84 yr) who completed demographic, general health and PA questionnaires and provided a blood sample were included in the analyses. Multivariable-adjusted linear regression models were used to determine associations between PA (domain-specific PA [household/yard work PA, transportation PA, moderate leisure time PA (LTPA), and vigorous LTPA], total moderate PA and PA recommendation groups), and log-transformed LTL adjusting for age, gender, education, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and body mass index. RESULTS: On average, an increase of 1 h·wk of vigorous LTPA was associated with a 0.31% (P < 0.001) longer LTL, and an increase of 1 h·wk of household/yard work PA was associated with a 0.21% (P = 0.03) shorter LTL while adjusted for sociodemographic and health behavior covariates. Neither transportation PA nor moderate LTPA was significantly associated with LTL. In addition, compared with not meeting the PA recommendation (<150 min·wk), exceeding the recommended PA levels (≥300 min·wk) was positively associated with longer LTL (P = 0.04), whereas there was no difference in telomere length between those not meeting versus those meeting the PA recommendation (150-299 min·wk). CONCLUSION: Greater engagement in vigorous LTPA and exceeding the PA recommendation may have a protective effect against telomere shortening. Future studies should examine the association between PA and LTL by exploring potential mediators such as sedentary behavior, genetics, nutrition, and chronic diseases.

Patient portals and personal health information online: perception, access, and use by US adults.

BACKGROUND: Access to online patient portals is key to improving care, but we have limited understanding of patient perceptions of online portals and the characteristics of people who use them. METHODS: Using a national survey of 3677 respondents, we describe perceptions and utilization of online personal health information (PHI) portals. RESULTS: Most respondents (92%) considered online PHI access important, yet only 34% were offered access to online PHI by a health care provider, and just 28% accessed online PHI in the past year. While there were no differences across race or ethnicity in importance of access, black and Hispanic respondents were significantly less likely to be offered access ( P = .006 and <.001, respectively) and less likely to access their online PHI ( P = .041 and <.001, respectively) compared to white and non-Hispanic respondents. CONCLUSION: Health care providers are crucial to the adoption and use of online patient portals and should be encouraged to offer consistent access regardless of patient race and ethnicity.

Fall Risk is Not Black and White.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether previously reported racial differences in fall rates between White and Black/African American is explained by differences in health status and neighborhood characteristics. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 550 White and 116 Black older adults in the Greater Boston area (mean age: 78 years; 36% men) who were English-speaking, able to walk across a room, and without severe cognitive impairment. MEASUREMENTS: Falls were prospectively reported using monthly fall calendars. The location of each fall and fall-related injuries were asked during telephone interviews. At baseline, we assessed risk factors for falls, including sociodemographic characteristics, physiologic risk factors, physical activity, and community-level characteristics. RESULTS: Over the mean follow-up of 1,048 days, 1,539 falls occurred (incidence: 806/1,000 person-years). Whites were more likely than Blacks to experience any falls (867 versus 504 falls per 1,000 person-years; RR [95% CI]: 1.77 [1.33, 2.36]), outdoor falls (418 versus 178 falls per 1,000 person-years; 1.78 [1.08, 2.92]), indoor falls (434 versus 320 falls per 1,000 person-years; 1.44 [1.02, 2.05]), and injurious falls (367 versus 205 falls per 1,000 person-years; 1.79 [1.30, 2.46]). With exception of injurious falls, higher fall rates in Whites than Blacks were substantially attenuated with adjustment for risk factors and community-level characteristics: any fall (1.24 [0.81, 1.89]), outdoor fall (1.57 [0.86, 2.88]), indoor fall (1.08 [0.64, 1.81]), and injurious fall (1.77 [1.14, 2.74]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the racial differences in fall rates may be largely due to confounding by individual-level and community-level characteristics.

A stiff price to pay: does joint stiffness predict disability in an older population?

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of joint stiffness and associated comorbidities in community-living older adults and to determine whether joint stiffness, independent of pain, contributes to new and worsening disability. DESIGN: Population-based cohort. SETTING: Urban and suburban communities in the Boston, Massachusetts, area. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 70 and older (N = 765) underwent a baseline home interview and clinic examination, 680 participants completed the 18-month follow-up. MEASUREMENTS: Morning joint stiffness on most days in the past month was assessed in the arms, back, hips, and knees. Mobility limitations were measured using self-reported difficulty and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). The home interview and clinic examination included extensive health measures. RESULTS: Four hundred one participants reported morning joint stiffness, half of these with one site of stiffness and the other half with multisite stiffness. Twenty percent of participants with multisite stiffness and 50% with single site stiffness did not have a major stiffness-associated condition. After adjustment for pain severity and other covariates, multisite stiffness was associated with a 64% greater risk of developing new or worsening mobility difficulty (relative risk = 1.64, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-2.79). Those with multisite stiffness had declined more quickly in physical performance over the 18-month follow up. CONCLUSION: Older adults with multisite stiffness are more likely to be at risk of disability than those without joint stiffness after accounting for pain severity and the presence of stiffness-associated conditions. Better assessment, along with strategies to prevent and treat multisite joint stiffness is needed to prevent or slow the progression of disability in elderly adults.

Evaluation of the performance of existing non-laboratory based cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms.

BACKGROUND: The high burden and rising incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in resource constrained countries necessitates implementation of robust and pragmatic primary and secondary prevention strategies. Many current CVD management guidelines recommend absolute cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment as a clinically sound guide to preventive and treatment strategies. Development of non-laboratory based cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms enable absolute risk assessment in resource constrained countries.The objective of this review is to evaluate the performance of existing non-laboratory based CV risk assessment algorithms using the benchmarks for clinically useful CV risk assessment algorithms outlined by Cooney and colleagues. METHODS: A literature search to identify non-laboratory based risk prediction algorithms was performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Ovid Premier Nursing Journals Plus, and PubMed databases. The identified algorithms were evaluated using the benchmarks for clinically useful cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms outlined by Cooney and colleagues. RESULTS: Five non-laboratory based CV risk assessment algorithms were identified. The Gaziano and Framingham algorithms met the criteria for appropriateness of statistical methods used to derive the algorithms and endpoints. The Swedish Consultation, Framingham and Gaziano algorithms demonstrated good discrimination in derivation datasets. Only the Gaziano algorithm was externally validated where it had optimal discrimination. The Gaziano and WHO algorithms had chart formats which made them simple and user friendly for clinical application. CONCLUSION: Both the Gaziano and Framingham non-laboratory based algorithms met most of the criteria outlined by Cooney and colleagues. External validation of the algorithms in diverse samples is needed to ascertain their performance and applicability to different populations and to enhance clinicians' confidence in them.

Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: patients and doctors look ahead: patient and physician surveys.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about what primary care physicians (PCPs) and patients would expect if patients were invited to read their doctors' office notes. OBJECTIVE: To explore attitudes toward potential benefits or harms if PCPs offered patients ready access to visit notes. DESIGN: The PCPs and patients completed surveys before joining a voluntary program that provided electronic links to doctors' notes. SETTING: Primary care practices in 3 U.S. states. PARTICIPANTS: Participating and nonparticipating PCPs and adult patients at primary care practices in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Washington. MEASUREMENTS: Doctors' and patients' attitudes toward and expectations of open visit notes, their ideas about the potential benefits and risks, and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: 110 of 114 participating PCPs (96%), 63 of 140 nonparticipating PCPs (45%), and 37 856 of 90 203 patients (42%) completed surveys. Overall, 69% to 81% of participating PCPs across the 3 sites and 92% to 97% of patients thought open visit notes were a good idea, compared with 16% to 33% of nonparticipating PCPs. Similarly, participating PCPs and patients generally agreed with statements about potential benefits of open visit notes, whereas nonparticipating PCPs were less likely to agree. Among participating PCPs, 74% to 92% anticipated improved communication and patient education, in contrast to 45% to 67% of nonparticipating PCPs. More than one half of participating PCPs (50% to 58%) and most nonparticipating PCPs (88% to 92%) expected that open visit notes would result in greater worry among patients; far fewer patients concurred (12% to 16%). Thirty-six percent to 50% of participating PCPs and 83% to 84% of nonparticipating PCPs anticipated more patient questions between visits. Few PCPs (0% to 33%) anticipated increased risk for lawsuits. Patient enthusiasm extended across age, education, and health status, and 22% anticipated sharing visit notes with others, including other doctors. LIMITATIONS: Access to electronic patient portals is not widespread, and participation was limited to patients using such portals. Response rates were higher among participating PCPs than nonparticipating PCPs; many participating PCPs had small patient panels. CONCLUSION: Among PCPs, opinions about open visit notes varied widely in terms of predicting the effect on their practices and benefits for patients. In contrast, patients expressed considerable enthusiasm and few fears, anticipating both improved understanding and more involvement in care. Sharing visit notes has broad implications for quality of care, privacy, and shared accountability. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Pioneer Portfolio, Drane Family Fund, and Koplow Charitable Foundation.

Obesity, race, and risk for death or functional decline among Medicare beneficiaries: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The adverse effect of obesity on health outcomes may be lower in older and African American adults than in the general U.S. population. OBJECTIVE: To examine and compare the relationship between obesity and all-cause mortality and functional decline among older U.S. adults. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Secondary analysis of data from the 1994 to 2000 Medicare Current Beneficiary Surveys, linked to Medicare enrollment files through 22 April 2008. PARTICIPANTS: 20,975 community-dwelling participants in the 1994 to 2000 Medicare Current Beneficiary Surveys who were aged 65 years or older. MEASUREMENTS: All-cause mortality through 22 April 2008; new or worsening disability in performing activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) in 2 years. RESULTS: 37% of the study sample were overweight (body mass index [BMI] of 25 to <30 kg/m(2)), 18% were obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m(2)), 48% died during the 14-year follow-up, and 27% had ADL and 43% had IADL disability at baseline. Among those without severe disability at baseline, 17% developed new or worsening ADL disability and 26% developed new or worsening IADL disability within 2 years. After adjustment, adults with a BMI of 35 kg/m(2) or greater were the only group above the normal BMI range who had a higher risk for mortality (hazard ratio, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.20 to 1.85] in men and 1.21 [CI, 1.06 to 1.39] in women, compared with the reference group [BMI of 22.0 to 24.9 kg/m(2)]; P for BMI-sex interaction = 0.003). In contrast, both overweight and obesity were associated with new or progressive ADL and IADL disability in a dose-dependent manner, particularly for white men and women. Significant interactions were detected between BMI and sex but not between BMI and race for any outcome, although risk estimates for ADL disability seemed attenuated in African American relative to white respondents. LIMITATION: This was an observational study, baseline data were self-reported, and the study had limited power to detect differences between white and African American respondents. CONCLUSION: Among older U.S. adults, obesity was not associated with mortality, except for those with at least moderately severe obesity. However, lower levels of obesity were associated with new or worsening disability within 2 years. Efforts to prevent disability in older adults should target those who are overweight or obese. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Activities of daily living function and disability in older adults in a randomized trial of the health enhancement program.

BACKGROUND: Disability in basic activities of daily living (ADLs) implies a loss of independence and increases the risk for hospitalization, nursing home admission, and death. Little is known about ways by which ADL disability can be prevented or reversed. The authors evaluated the efficacy of the Health Enhancement Program in preventing and reducing ADL disability in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: The authors analyzed data from a 12-month, randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial of a disability prevention, chronic disease self-management program involving 201 adults aged 70 years and older that was conducted from February 1995 to June 1996 at a senior center in western Washington state. Activities of daily living disability incidence, improvement, and worsening were assessed using intention-to-treat methods. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of ADL disability among those who were not ADL disabled at baseline (n = 56 in the intervention group, n = 57 in the control group) was modestly lower in the intervention group than in the control group at 12 months (14.3% vs 21.3%, p = .466). Cumulative improvement in ADL function among those who reported any ADL disability at baseline (n = 41 in the intervention group, n = 43 in the control group) was greater in the intervention group at 12 months (80.5% vs 46.5%, p = .026). The likelihood for ADL improvement was greater in the intervention group compared with controls at 12 months (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.05 to 3.22; p = .020). Cumulative worsening of ADL function was slightly lower in the intervention group at 12 months (18.6% vs 26.5%, p = .237). Intervention participants tended to be at lower risk for ADL worsening (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 1.30; p = .266) compared with control participants. CONCLUSION: The Health Enhancement Program intervention led to improved ADL functioning in those who were disabled initially and thereby offers a promising strategy for limiting or reversing functional decline in disabled elderly persons.