Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Opioid Prescribing on Hospital Discharge Among Older Adults: A National Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in opioid prescribing among racial and ethnic groups have been observed in outpatient and emergency department settings, but it is unknown whether similar disparities exist at discharge among hospitalized older adults. OBJECTIVE: To determine filled opioid prescription rates on hospital discharge by race/ethnicity among Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older discharged from hospital in 2016, without opioid fills in the 90 days prior to hospitalization (opioid-naïve). MAIN MEASURES: Race/ethnicity was categorized by the Research Triangle Institute (RTI), grouped as Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, other (American Indian/Alaska Native/unknown/other), and White. The primary outcome was an opioid prescription claim within 2 days of hospital discharge. The secondary outcome was total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) among adults with a filled opioid prescription. KEY RESULTS: Among 316,039 previously opioid-naïve beneficiaries (mean age, 76.8 years; 56.2% female), 49,131 (15.5%) filled an opioid prescription within 2 days of hospital discharge. After adjustment, Black beneficiaries were 6% less likely (relative risk [RR] 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.97) and Asian/Pacific Islander beneficiaries were 9% more likely (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03-1.14) to have filled an opioid prescription when compared to White beneficiaries. Among beneficiaries with a filled opioid prescription, mean total MMEs were lower among Black (356.9; adjusted difference - 4%, 95% CI - 7 to - 1%), Hispanic (327.0; adjusted difference - 7%, 95% CI - 10 to - 4%), and Asian/Pacific Islander (328.2; adjusted difference - 8%, 95% CI - 12 to - 4%) beneficiaries when compared to White beneficiaries (409.7). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Black older adults were less likely to fill a new opioid prescription after hospital discharge when compared to White older adults and received lower total MMEs. The factors contributing to these differential prescribing patterns should be investigated further.

MRI Assessment of Myocardial Deformation for Risk Stratification of Major Arrhythmic Events in Patients With Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Eligible for Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) intervention is an established prophylactic measure. Identifying high-benefit patients poses challenges. PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) parameters including myocardial deformation for risk stratification of ICD intervention in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) while accounting for competing mortality risk. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective and prospective. POPULATION: One hundred and fifty-nine NICM patients eligible for primary ICD (117 male, 54 ± 13 years) and 49 control subjects (38 male, 53 ± 5 years). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) and three-dimensional phase-sensitive inversion-recovery late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) sequences at 1.5 T or 3 T. ASSESSMENT: Patients underwent MRI before ICD implantation and were followed up. Functional parameters, left ventricular global radial, circumferential and longitudinal strain, right ventricular free wall longitudinal strain (RV FWLS) and left atrial strain were measured (Circle, cvi42). LGE presence was assessed visually. The primary endpoint was appropriate ICD intervention. Models were developed to determine outcome, with and without accounting for competing risk (non-sudden cardiac death), and compared to a baseline model including LGE and clinical features. STATISTICAL TESTS: Wilcoxon non-parametric test, Cox's proportional hazards regression, Fine-Gray competing risk model, and cumulative incidence functions. Harrell's c statistic was used for model selection. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Follow-up duration was 1176 ± 960 days (median: 896). Twenty-six patients (16%) met the primary endpoint. RV FWLS demonstrated a significant difference between patients with and without events (-12.5% ± 5 vs. -16.4% ± 5.5). Univariable analyses showed LGE and RV FWLS were significantly associated with outcome (LGE: hazard ratio [HR] = 3.69, 95% CI = 1.28-10.62; RV FWLS: HR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.30-3.22). RV FWLS significantly improved the prognostic value of baseline model and remained significant in multivariable analysis, accounting for competing risk (HR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.12-2.66). DATA CONCLUSIONS: In NICM, RV FWLS may provide additional predictive value for predicting appropriate ICD intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

Factors associated with disagreement between clinician app-based ultra-brief Confusion Assessment Method and reference standard delirium assessments.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the Ultra-Brief Confusion Assessment Method (UB-CAM), designed to help physicians and nurses to recognize delirium, showed high, but imperfect, accuracy compared with Research Reference Standard Delirium Assessments (RRSDAs). The aim of this study is to identify factors associated with disagreement between clinicians' app-based UB-CAM assessments and RRSDAs. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective diagnostic test study. The study was conducted at two hospitals and included 527 inpatients (≥70 years old) and 289 clinicians (53 physicians, 236 nurses). Trained research associates performed RRSDAs and determined delirium presence using the CAM. Clinicians administered the UB-CAM using an iPad app. Disagreement factors considered were clinician, patient, and delirium characteristics. We report odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred and ninety-five clinician UB-CAM assessments paired with RRSDAs were administered. The prevalence of delirium was 17%. The rate of disagreement between clinician UB-CAM assessments and RRSDAs was 12%. Significant factors associated with disagreement between clinician UB-CAM assessments and RRSDAs (OR [95% CI]) included: presence of dementia (2.7 [1.8-4.1]), patient education high school or less (1.9 [1.3-2.9]), psychomotor retardation (2.5 [1.4-4.2]), and the presence of mild delirium or subsyndromal delirium (5.5 [3.5-8.7]). Significant risk factors for false negatives were patient age less than 80 (2.2 [1.1-4.3]) and mild delirium (3.5 [1.6-7.4]). Significant risk factors for false positives were presence of dementia (4.0 [2.3-7.0]), subsyndromal delirium (5.1 [2.9-9.1]), and patient education high school or less (2.0 [1.2-3.6]). Clinician characteristics were not significantly associated with disagreement. CONCLUSIONS: The strongest factors associated with disagreement between clinician UB-CAM screens and RRSDAs were the presence of dementia and subsyndromal delirium as risk factors for false positives, and mild delirium and younger age as a risk factor for false negatives. These disagreement factors contrast with previous studies of risk factors for incorrect clinician delirium screening, and better align screening results with patient outcomes.

Partnering with Patients and Families to Improve Diagnostic Safety through the OurDX Tool: Effects of Race, Ethnicity, and Language Preference.

BACKGROUND: Patients and families at risk for health disparities may also be at higher risk for diagnostic errors but less likely to report them. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore differences in race, ethnicity, and language preference associated with patient and family contributions and concerns using an electronic previsit tool designed to engage patients and families in the diagnostic process (DxP). METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 5,731 patients and families presenting to three subspecialty clinics at an urban pediatric hospital May to December 2021 who completed a previsit tool, codeveloped and tested with patients and families. Prior to each visit, patients/families were invited to share visit priorities, recent histories, and potential diagnostic concerns. We used logistic regression to determine factors associated with patient-reported diagnostic concerns. We conducted chart review on a random subset of visits to review concerns and determine whether patient/family contributions were included in the visit note. RESULTS: Participants provided a similar mean number of contributions regardless of patient race, ethnicity, or language preference. Compared with patients self-identifying as White, those self-identifying as Black (odds ratio [OR]: 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.18, 2.43]) or "other" race (OR: 1.48; 95% CI: [1.08, 2.03]) were more likely to report a diagnostic concern. Participants who preferred a language other than English were more likely to report a diagnostic concern than English-preferring patients (OR: 2.53; 95% CI: [1.78, 3.59]. There were no significant differences in physician-verified diagnostic concerns or in integration of patient contributions into the note based on race, ethnicity, or language preference. CONCLUSION: Participants self-identifying as Black or "other" race, or those who prefer a language other than English were 1.5 to 2.5 times more likely than their counterparts to report potential diagnostic concerns when proactively asked to provide this information prior to a visit. Actively engaging patients and families in the DxP may uncover opportunities to reduce the risk of diagnostic errors and potential safety disparities.

Diagnostic error experiences of patients and families with limited English-language health literacy or disadvantaged socioeconomic position in a cross-sectional US population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Language barrier, reduced self-advocacy, lower health literacy or biased care may hinder the diagnostic process. Data on how patients/families with limited English-language health literacy (LEHL) or disadvantaged socioeconomic position (dSEP) experience diagnostic errors are sparse. METHOD: We compared patient-reported diagnostic errors, contributing factors and impacts between respondents with LEHL or dSEP and their counterparts in the 2017 Institute for Healthcare Improvement US population-based survey, using contingency analysis and multivariable logistic regression models for the analyses. RESULTS: 596 respondents reported a diagnostic error; among these, 381 reported LEHL or dSEP. After adjusting for sex, race/ethnicity and physical health, individuals with LEHL/dSEP were more likely than their counterparts to report unique contributing factors: "(No) qualified translator or healthcare provider that spoke (the patient's) language" (OR and 95% CI 4.4 (1.3 to 14.9)); "not understanding the follow-up plan" (1.9 (1.1 to 3.1)); "too many providers… but no clear leader" (1.8 (1.2 to 2.7)); "not able to keep follow-up appointments" (1.9 (1.1 to 3.2)); "not being able to pay for necessary medical care" (2.5 (1.4 to 4.4)) and "out-of-date or incorrect medical records" (2.6 (1.4 to 4.8)). Participants with LEHL/dSEP were more likely to report long-term emotional, financial and relational impacts, compared with their counterparts. Subgroup analysis (LEHL-only and dSEP-only participants) showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with LEHL or dSEP identified unique and actionable contributing factors to diagnostic errors. Interpreter access should be viewed as a diagnostic safety imperative, social determinants affecting care access/affordability should be routinely addressed as part of the diagnostic process and patients/families should be encouraged to access and update their medical records. The frequent and disproportionate long-term impacts from self-reported diagnostic error among LEHL/dSEP patients/families raises urgency for greater prevention and supportive efforts.

Comparative salary-related costs of a brief app-directed delirium identification protocol by hospitalists, nurses, and nursing assistants.

BACKGROUND: Systematic screening can improve delirium identification among hospitalized older adults. Prior studies have shown clinicians and health system leaders may believe they do not have the time and resources for assessment. We conducted a comparative salary-related cost analysis of an adaptive delirium identification protocol directed by an iPad app. METHODS: We recruited 527 older adult medicine patients from an urban academic medical center (n = 269) and a rural community hospital (n = 258). Physicians and nurses completed the two-step Ultra-brief Confusion Assessment Method (UB-CAM) protocol (with or without a skip pattern), while certified nursing assistants completed only the UB-2 ultra-brief screen. The sample included 527 patients (average age 80, 57% women, 35% with dementia). Time required to administer the protocol was collected automatically by the iPad app. Salary-related costs of screening were determined by multiplying the time required by the hourly wage for the three disciplines, as obtained from national and regional published healthcare salary cost data. Cost estimates for entire hospital implementation were also calculated. RESULTS: Participants were screened on 924 hospital days by 399 clinicians (53 physicians, 236 nurses, 110 CNAs). For the UB-2, CNAs cost per screen was lower than the other clinician types ($0.37 per screen vs. $0.73 for nurses and $2.39 for hospitalists). For the UB-CAM with skip (UB-CAM), costs per protocol were $1.10 for nurses vs. $3.61 for physicians. The annual salary-related costs of hospital-wide implementation of a nurse-based UB-CAM protocol in a medium-sized (300-bed) hospital was $63,015 plus $4356 for initial and annual training. CONCLUSIONS: CNAs and nurses had the lowest salary-associated costs for app-directed CAM-based delirium screening and identification, respectively. Salary-related annual hospital costs for the most efficient protocols in a medium-sized hospital were less than the annual cost of hiring 1 FTE of the discipline performing the protocols.

Association of Diagnosed Dementia with Post-discharge Mortality and Readmission Among Hospitalized Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Patients with dementia are frequently hospitalized and may face barriers in post-discharge care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with dementia have an increased risk of adverse outcomes following discharge. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized in 2016. MAIN MEASURES: Co-primary outcomes were mortality and readmission within 30 days of discharge. Multivariable logistic regression models were estimated to assess the risk of each outcome for patients with and without dementia accounting for demographics, comorbidities, frailty, hospitalization factors, and disposition. KEY RESULTS: The cohort included 1,089,109 hospitalizations of which 211,698 (19.3%) were of patients with diagnosed dementia (median (IQR) age 83 (76-89); 61.5% female) and 886,411 were of patients without dementia (median (IQR) age 76 (79-83); 55.0% female). At 30 days following discharge, 5.7% of patients with dementia had died compared to 3.1% of patients without dementia (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.21; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.24). At 30 days following discharge, 17.7% of patients with dementia had been readmitted compared to 13.1% of patients without dementia (aOR 1.02; CI 1.002 to 1.04). Dementia was associated with an increased odds of readmission among patients discharged to the community (aOR 1.07, CI 1.05 to 1.09) but a decreased odds of readmission among patients discharge to nursing facilities (aOR 0.93, CI 0.90 to 0.95). Patients with dementia who were discharged to the community were more likely to be readmitted than those discharged to nursing facilities (18.9% vs 16.0%), and, when readmitted, were more likely to die during the readmission (20.7% vs 4.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosed dementia was associated with a substantially increased risk of mortality and a modestly increased risk of readmission within 30 days of discharge. Patients with dementia discharged to the community had particularly elevated risk of adverse outcomes indicating possible gaps in post-discharge services and caregiver support.

Assessment of potential selection bias in neuroimaging studies of postoperative delirium and cognitive decline: lessons from the SAGES study.

Due to cost and participant burden, neuroimaging studies are often performed in relatively small samples of voluntary participants. This may lead to selection bias. It is important to identify factors associated with participation in neuroimaging studies and understand their effect on outcome measures. We investigated the effect of postoperative delirium on long-term (over 48 months) cognitive decline (LTCD) in 560 older surgical patients (≥ 70 years), including a nested MRI cohort (n = 146). We observed a discrepancy in the effect of delirium on cognitive decline as a function of MRI participation. Although overall difference in cognitive decline due to delirium was not greater than what might be expected due to chance (p = .21), in the non-MRI group delirium was associated with a faster pace of LTCD (-0.063, 95% CI -0.094 to -0.032, p < .001); while in the MRI group the effect of delirium was less and not significant (-0.023, 95% CI -0.076, 0.030, p = .39). Since this limits our ability to investigate the neural correlates of delirium and cognitive decline using MRI data, we attempted to mitigate the observed discrepancy using inverse probability weighting for MRI participation. The approach was not successful and the difference of the effect of delirium in slope was essentially unchanged. There was no evidence that the MRI sub-group experienced delirium that differed in severity relative to MRI non-participants. We could not attribute the observed discrepancy to selection bias based on measured factors. It may reflect a power issue due to the smaller MRI subsample or selection bias from unmeasured factors.

Risk factors for opioid-related adverse drug events among older adults after hospital discharge.

BACKGROUND: Although opioids are initiated on hospital discharge in millions of older adults each year, there are no studies examining patient- and prescribing-related risk factors for opioid-related adverse drug events (ADEs) after hospital discharge among medical patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older, hospitalized for a medical reason, with at least one claim for an opioid within 2 days of hospital discharge. We excluded patients receiving hospice care and patients admitted from or discharged to a facility. We used administrative billing codes and medication claims to define potential opioid-related ADEs within 30 days of hospital discharge, and competing risks regression to identify risk factors for these events. RESULTS: Among 22,879 medical hospitalizations (median age 74, 36.9% female) with an opioid claim within 2 days of hospital discharge, a potential opioid-related ADE occurred in 1604 (7.0%). Independent risk factors included age of 80 years and older (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05-1.33); clinical conditions, including kidney disease (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.37), dementia/delirium (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.22-1.56), anxiety disorder (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06-1.36), opioid use disorder (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.39), intestinal disorders (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.15-1.49), pancreaticobiliary disorders (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09-1.61), and musculoskeletal and nervous system injuries (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.17-1.54); red flags for opioid misuse (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.04-1.80); opioid use in the 30 days before hospitalization (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08-1.34); and prescription of long-acting opioids (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.06-1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Potential opioid-related ADEs occurred within 30 days of hospital discharge in 7.0% of older adults discharged from a medical hospitalization with an opioid prescription. Identified risk factors can be used to inform physician decision-making, conversations with older adults about risk, and development and targeting of harm reduction strategies.

Relative risks of adverse events among older adults receiving opioids versus NSAIDs after hospital discharge: A nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although analgesics are initiated on hospital discharge in millions of adults each year, studies quantifying the risks of opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) among older adults during this transition are limited. We sought to determine the incidence and risk of post-discharge adverse events among older adults with an opioid claim in the week after hospital discharge, compared to those with NSAID claims only. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries age 65 and older, hospitalized in United States hospitals in 2016. We excluded beneficiaries admitted from or discharged to a facility. We derived a propensity score that included over 100 factors potentially related to the choice of analgesic, including demographics, diagnoses, surgeries, and medication coadministrations. Using 3:1 propensity matching, beneficiaries with an opioid claim in the week after hospital discharge (with or without NSAID claims) were matched to beneficiaries with an NSAID claim only. Primary outcomes included death, healthcare utilization (emergency department [ED] visits and rehospitalization), and a composite of known adverse effects of opioids or NSAIDs (fall/fracture, delirium, nausea/vomiting, complications of slowed colonic motility, acute renal failure, and gastritis/duodenitis) within 30 days of discharge. After propensity matching, there were 13,385 beneficiaries in the opioid cohort and 4,677 in the NSAID cohort (mean age: 74 years, 57% female). Beneficiaries receiving opioids had a higher incidence of death (1.8% versus 1.1%; relative risk [RR] 1.7 [1.3 to 2.3], p < 0.001, number needed to harm [NNH] 125), healthcare utilization (19.0% versus 17.4%; RR 1.1 [1.02 to 1.2], p = 0.02, NNH 59), and any potential adverse effect (25.2% versus 21.3%; RR 1.2 [1.1 to 1.3], p < 0.001, NNH 26), compared to those with an NSAID claim only. Specifically, they had higher relative risk of fall/fracture (4.5% versus 3.4%; RR 1.3 [1.1 to 1.6], p = 0.002), nausea/vomiting (9.2% versus 7.3%; RR 1.3 [1.1 to 1.4], p < 0.001), and slowed colonic motility (8.0% versus 6.2%; RR 1.3 [1.1 to 1.4], p < 0.001). Risks of delirium, acute renal failure, and gastritis/duodenitis did not differ between groups. The main limitation of our study is the observational nature of the data and possibility of residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults filling an opioid prescription in the week after hospital discharge were at higher risk for mortality and other post-discharge adverse outcomes compared to those filling an NSAID prescription only.

Disparities in United States hospitalizations for serious infections in patients with and without opioid use disorder: A nationwide observational study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are hospitalized for serious infections requiring prolonged intravenous antibiotics may face barriers to discharge, which could prolong hospital length of stay (LOS) and increase financial burden. We investigated differences in LOS, discharge disposition, and charges between hospitalizations for serious infections in patients with and without OUD. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We utilized the 2016 National Inpatient Sample-a nationally representative database of all discharges from US acute care hospitals. The population of interest was all hospitalizations for infective endocarditis, epidural abscess, septic arthritis, or osteomyelitis. The exposure was OUD, and the primary outcome was LOS until discharge, assessed by using a competing risks analysis to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs). Adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of discharge disposition and adjusted differences in hospital charges were also reported. Of 95,470 estimated hospitalizations for serious infections (infective endocarditis, epidural abscess, septic arthritis, and osteomyelitis), the mean age was 49 years and 35% were female. 46% had Medicare (government-based insurance coverage for people age 65+ years), and 70% were non-Hispanic white. After adjustment for potential confounders, OUD was associated with a lower probability of discharge at any given LOS (aHR 0.61; 95% CI 0.59-0.63; p < 0.001). OUD was also associated with lower odds of discharge to home (aOR 0.38; 95% CI 0.33-0.43; p < 0.001) and higher odds of discharge to a post-acute care facility (aOR 1.85; 95% CI 1.57-2.17; p < 0.001) or patient-directed discharge (also referred to as "discharge against medical advice") (aOR 3.47; 95% CI 2.80-4.29; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in average total hospital charges, though daily hospital charges were significantly lower for patients with OUD. Limitations include the potential for unmeasured confounders and the use of billing codes to identify cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that among hospitalizations for some serious infections, those involving patients with OUD were associated with longer LOS, higher odds of discharge to post-acute care facilities or patient-directed discharge, and similar total hospital charges, despite lower daily charges. These findings highlight opportunities to improve care for patients with OUD hospitalized with serious infections, and to reduce the growing associated costs.

Readiness, Availability and Utilization of Rural Vietnamese Health Facilities for Community Based Primary Care of Non-communicable Diseases: A CrossSectional Survey of 3 Provinces in Northern Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: Vietnam's network of commune health centers (CHCs) have historically managed acute infectious diseases and implemented national disease-specific vertical programs. Vietnam has undergone an epidemiological transition towards non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Limited data exist on Vietnamese CHC capacity to prevent, diagnose, and treat NCDs. In this paper, we assess NCD service readiness, availability, and utilization at rural CHCs in 3 provinces in northern Vietnam. METHODS: Between January 2014 and April 2014, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of 89 rural CHCs from 3 provinces. Our study outcomes included service readiness, availability of equipment and medications, and utilization for five NCD conditions: hypertension, diabetes, chronic pulmonary diseases, cancer, and mental illnesses. RESULTS: NCD service availability was limited, except for mental health. Only 25% of CHCs indicated that they conducted activities focused on NCD prevention. Patient utilization of CHCs was approximately 223 visits per month or 8 visits per day. We found a statistically significant difference (P<.05) for NCD service availability, medication availability and CHC utilization among the 3 provinces studied. CONCLUSION: This is the first multi-site study on NCD service availability in Vietnam and the first study in a mountainous region consisting predominately of ethnic minorities. Despite strong government support for NCD prevention and control, Vietnam's current network of CHCs has limited NCD service capacity.

Evaluation of a Novel Preference Assessment Tool for Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: We developed a preference assessment tool to help assess patient goals, values, and preferences for multiple sclerosis (MS) management. All preference items in the tool were generated by people with MS. The aim of this study was to evaluate this tool in a national sample of people with MS. METHODS: English-speaking patients with MS aged 21 to 75 years with access to the internet were recruited. Participants completed the preference tool online, which included separate modules assessing three core preference areas: treatment goals, preferences for attributes of disease-modifying therapies, and factors influencing a change in treatment. The tool generated a summary of participants' treatment goals and preferences. Immediately after viewing the summary, participants were asked to evaluate the tool. Rankings of preference domains were compared with rankings obtained in another study. RESULTS: In 135 people with MS who completed the tool and evaluation, the highest ranked goal was brain health (memory, thinking, brain), followed by disability concerns (walking, strength, vision). Rankings were highly similar to those in the referent study. Nearly all participants reported that the tool helped them understand their goals and priorities regarding MS and that the summary appropriately reflected what is important to them. Most participants (87%) wanted to discuss their treatment goals and priorities with their clinician. CONCLUSIONS: This preference assessment tool successfully captured patients' goals, values, and preferences for MS treatment and could potentially be used to help patients communicate their preferences to their clinician.

Honorary Authorship in Radiologic Research Articles: Assessment of Pattern and Longitudinal Evolution.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To analyze the pattern and longitudinal evolution of honorary authorship in major radiology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this Institutional Review Board-approved study, an electronic survey was sent to first authors of original research articles published in the American Journal of Roentgenology, European Radiology, the Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Radiology during 2 years (July 2014 through June 2016). Questions addressed the perception of honorary authorship and contributing factors, as well as demographic information. Univariate analysis was performed by using χ2 tests. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess independent factors associated with the perception of honorary authorship. RESULTS: Of 1839 first authors, 315 (17.3%) responded. Of these, 31.4% (97/309) perceived that at least one coauthor did not make sufficient contributions to merit authorship and 54.3% (159/293) stated that one or more coauthors performed only "nonauthor" tasks according to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria. Of eight factors significantly associated with the perception of honorary authorship on univariate analysis, two were retained by the stepwise multivariate model: having someone suggest adding an author and a coauthor performing only a nonauthorship task. CONCLUSION: There has been little variation in the perception of honorary authorship among first authors of original research articles in radiology. The suggestion of adding an author and having coauthors performing only nonauthorship tasks are the two most important risk factors for honorary authorship. Our findings indicate that a prolonged course of transformation of current cultural norms is required to decrease honorary authorship.

Derivation and Validation of a Severity Scoring Method for the 3-Minute Diagnostic Interview for Confusion Assessment Method--Defined Delirium.

OBJECTIVES: To derive and validate a method for scoring delirium severity using a recently validated, brief, structured diagnostic interview for Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)-defined delirium (3D-CAM) and to demonstrate its agreement with the CAM Severity short form (CAM-S SF) as the reference standard. DESIGN: Derivation and validation analysis in a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Two academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 70 and older enrolled in the Successful Aging after Elective Surgery Study undergoing major elective noncardiac surgery (N = 566). MEASUREMENTS: The sample was randomly divided into a derivation dataset (n = 377) and an independent validation dataset (n = 189). These datasets were used to develop a severity scoring method using the 3D-CAM based on the four-item CAM-S SF (3D-CAM-S) and evaluate agreement between the 3D-CAM-S and the traditional CAM-S SF using weighted kappa statistics. RESULTS: A method for scoring severity using 3D-CAM items was developed that achieved good agreement with the CAM-S SF in the derivation dataset (κ = 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93-0.95). The 3D-CAM-S achieved nearly identical agreement in the independent validation dataset (κ = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.92-0.95), and 100% of 3D-CAM-S scores were within 1 point of the CAM-S SF score in both datasets. The 3D-CAM-S also strongly predicts clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: A newly developed method for scoring delirium severity using the 3D-CAM (the 3D-CAM-S) has excellent agreement with the CAM-S SF. This new methodology enables clinicians and researchers using the 3D-CAM for surveillance to measure delirium severity and monitor its course simultaneously by tracking changes over time. The 3D-CAM-S expands the utility of the 3D-CAM as an important tool for delirium recognition and management.

Patients learning to read their doctors' notes: the importance of reminders.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether patients invited to review their clinicians' notes continue to access them and to assess the impact of reminders on whether patients continued to view notes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We followed OpenNotes trial participants for 2 years at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) and Geisinger Health System (GHS). Electronic invitations alerting patients to signed notes stopped at GHS after year 1, creating a natural experiment to assess the impact of reminders. We used generalized linear models to measure whether notes were viewed within 30 days of availability. RESULTS: We identified 14 360 patients (49 271 visits); mean age 52.2; 57.8% female. In year 1, patients viewed 57.5% of their notes, and their interest in viewing notes persisted over time. In year 2, BIDMC patients viewed notes with similar frequency. In contrast, GHS patients viewed notes far less frequently, a change starting when invitations ceased (RR 0.29 [0.26-0.32]) and persisting to the end of the study (RR 0.20 [0.17-0.23]). A subanalysis of BIDMC patients revealed that black and other/multiracial patients also continued to view notes, although they were overall less likely to view notes compared with whites (RR 0.75 [0.67-0.83] and 0.93 [0.89-0.98], respectively). DISCUSSION: As millions of patients nationwide increasingly gain access to clinicians' notes, explicit email invitations to review notes may be important for fostering patient engagement and patient-doctor communication. CONCLUSION: Note viewing persists when accompanied by email alerts, but may decline substantially in their absence. Non-white patients at BIDMC viewed notes less frequently than whites, although their interest also persisted.

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.

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment: Creating a Crosswalk with the Mini-Mental State Examination.

OBJECTIVES: To establish Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores that correspond to well-established cut-points on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: General medical service of a large teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 75 and older (N = 199; mean age 84, 63% female). MEASUREMENTS: The MoCA (range 0-30) and the MMSE (range 0-30) were administered within 2 hours of each other. The Abbreviated MoCA (A-MoCA; range 0-22) was calculated from the full MoCA. Scores from the three tests were analyzed using equipercentile equating, a statistical method for determining comparable scores on different tests of a similar construct by estimating percentile equivalents. RESULTS: MoCA scores were lower (mean 19.3 ± 5.8) than MMSE scored (mean 24.1 ± 6.6). Traditional MMSE cut-points of 27 for mild cognitive impairment and 23 for dementia corresponded to MoCA scores of 23 and 17, respectively. CONCLUSION: Scores on the full and abbreviated versions of the MoCA can be linked directly to the MMSE. The MoCA may be more sensitive to changes in cognitive performance at higher levels of functioning.

Quantitative assessment of nipple perfusion with near-infrared fluorescence imaging.

Preserving the nipple-areolar complex with a nipple-sparing mastectomy improves cosmesis compared with skin-sparing mastectomy. However, complications such as necrosis of the nipple-areolar complex significantly affect cosmetic outcome. Many factors influence nipple-areolar perfusion, and no consensus currently exists on optimal incisional choice. This study evaluates 2 nipple-sparing mastectomy incision models using near-infrared fluorescence to assess perfusion quantitatively. The periareolar and radial incisions were compared with 2 control models in Yorkshire pigs (N = 6). Methylene blue and indocyanine green were injected intravenously, and near-infrared fluorescence images were recorded at 3 time points: before surgery, immediately after (0 hour), and 3 days postoperatively. Contrast-to-background ratio was used to assess perfusion. At 72 hours, radial incisions showed a statistically significantly higher perfusion compared with periareolar incisions (P < 0.05). Based on our findings, radial incisions for nipple-sparing mastectomy may be preferable due to higher perfusion; however, clinical trials are necessary for further assessment.