Racial, Ethnic, and Language-Based Inequities in Inpatient Opioid Prescribing by Diagnosis from Internal Medicine Services, a Retrospective Cohort Study.

Introduction: Opioid administration is extremely common in the inpatient setting, yet we do not know how the administration of opioids varies across different medical conditions and patient characteristics on internal medicine services. Our goal was to assess racial, ethnic, and language-based inequities in opioid prescribing practices for patients admitted to internal medicine services. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients admitted to internal medicine services from 2013 to 2021 and identified subcohorts of patients treated for the six most frequent primary hospital conditions (pneumonia, sepsis, cellulitis, gastrointestinal bleed, pyelonephritis/urinary tract infection, and respiratory disease) and three select conditions typically associated with pain (abdominal pain, acute back pain, and pancreatitis). We conducted a negative binomial regression analysis to determine how average administered daily opioids, measured as morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), were associated with race, ethnicity, and language, while adjusting for additional patient demographics, hospitalization characteristics, medical comorbidities, prior opioid therapy, and substance use disorders. Results: The study cohort included 61,831 patient hospitalizations. In adjusted models, we found that patients with limited English proficiency received significantly fewer opioids (66 MMEs, 95% CI: 52, 80) compared to English-speaking patients (101 MMEs, 95% CI: 91, 111). Asian (59 MMEs, 95% CI: 51, 66), Latinx (89 MMEs, 95% CI: 79, 100), and multi-race/ethnicity patients (81 MMEs, 95% CI: 65, 97) received significantly fewer opioids compared to white patients (103 MMEs, 95% CI: 94, 112). American Indian/Alaska Native (227 MMEs, 95% CI: 110, 344) patients received significantly more opioids. Significant inequities were also identified across race, ethnicity, and language groups when analyses were conducted within the subcohorts. Most notably, Asian and Latinx patients received significantly fewer MMEs and American Indian/Alaska Native patients received significantly more MMEs compared to white patients for the top six most frequent conditions. Most patients from minority groups also received fewer MMEs compared to white patients for three select pain conditions. Discussion. There are notable inequities in opioid prescribing based on patient race, ethnicity, and language status for those admitted to inpatient internal medicine services across all conditions and in the subcohorts of the six most frequent hospital conditions and three pain-associated conditions. This represents an institutional and societal opportunity for quality improvement initiatives to promote equitable pain management.

Assessment of the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Nonhospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

Importance: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have higher rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but the risk and predictors of VTE among individuals with less severe COVID-19 managed in outpatient settings are less well understood. Objectives: To assess the risk of VTE among outpatients with COVID-19 and identify independent predictors of VTE. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at 2 integrated health care delivery systems in Northern and Southern California. Data for this study were obtained from the Kaiser Permanente Virtual Data Warehouse and electronic health records. Participants included nonhospitalized adults aged 18 years or older with COVID-19 diagnosed between January 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021, with follow-up through February 28, 2021. Exposures: Patient demographic and clinical characteristics identified from integrated electronic health records. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the rate per 100 person-years of diagnosed VTE, which was identified using an algorithm based on encounter diagnosis codes and natural language processing. Multivariable regression using a Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model was used to identify variables independently associated with VTE risk. Multiple imputation was used to address missing data. Results: A total of 398 530 outpatients with COVID-19 were identified. The mean (SD) age was 43.8 (15.8) years, 53.7% were women, and 54.3% were of self-reported Hispanic ethnicity. There were 292 (0.1%) VTE events identified over the follow-up period, for an overall rate of 0.26 (95% CI, 0.24-0.30) per 100 person-years. The sharpest increase in VTE risk was observed during the first 30 days after COVID-19 diagnosis (unadjusted rate, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.51-0.67 per 100 person-years vs 0.09; 95% CI, 0.08-0.11 per 100 person-years after 30 days). In multivariable models, the following variables were associated with a higher risk for VTE in the setting of nonhospitalized COVID-19: age 55 to 64 years (HR 1.85 [95% CI, 1.26-2.72]), 65 to 74 years (3.43 [95% CI, 2.18-5.39]), 75 to 84 years (5.46 [95% CI, 3.20-9.34]), greater than or equal to 85 years (6.51 [95% CI, 3.05-13.86]), male gender (1.49 [95% CI, 1.15-1.96]), prior VTE (7.49 [95% CI, 4.29-13.07]), thrombophilia (2.52 [95% CI, 1.04-6.14]), inflammatory bowel disease (2.43 [95% CI, 1.02-5.80]), body mass index 30.0-39.9 (1.57 [95% CI, 1.06-2.34]), and body mass index greater than or equal to 40.0 (3.07 [1.95-4.83]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of outpatients with COVID-19, the absolute risk of VTE was low. Several patient-level factors were associated with higher VTE risk; these findings may help identify subsets of patients with COVID-19 who may benefit from more intensive surveillance or VTE preventive strategies.

COVID-19 and Risk of VTE in Ethnically Diverse Populations.

BACKGROUND: Limited existing data suggest that the novel COVID-19 may increase risk of VTE, but information from large, ethnically diverse populations with appropriate control participants is lacking. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the rate of VTE among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 differ from matched hospitalized control participants without COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study among hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and hospitalized adults without evidence of COVID-19 matched for age, sex, race or ethnicity, acute illness severity, and month of hospitalization between January 2020 and August 2020 from two integrated health care delivery systems with 36 hospitals. Outcomes included VTE (DVT or pulmonary embolism ascertained using diagnosis codes combined with validated natural language processing algorithms applied to electronic health records) and death resulting from any cause at 30 days. Fine and Gray hazards regression was performed to evaluate the association of COVID-19 with VTE after accounting for competing risk of death and residual differences between groups, as well as to identify predictors of VTE in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: We identified 6,319 adults with COVID-19 and 6,319 matched adults without COVID-19, with mean ± SD age of 60.0 ± 17.2 years, 46% women, 53.1% Hispanic, 14.6% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 10.3% Black. During 30-day follow-up, 313 validated cases of VTE (160 COVID-19, 153 control participants) and 1,172 deaths (817 in patients with COVID-19, 355 in control participants) occurred. Adults with COVID-19 showed a more than threefold adjusted risk of VTE (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.48; 95% CI, 2.03-5.98) compared with matched control participants. Predictors of VTE in patients with COVID-19 included age ≥ 55 years, Black race, prior VTE, diagnosed sepsis, prior moderate or severe liver disease, BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2, and platelet count > 217 k/µL. INTERPRETATION: Among ethnically diverse hospitalized adults, COVID-19 infection increased the risk of VTE, and selected patient characteristics were associated with higher thromboembolic risk in the setting of COVID-19.

Time to Recognition of Sepsis in the Emergency Department Using Electronic Health Record Data: A Comparative Analysis of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: Early identification of sepsis is critical to improving patient outcomes. Impact of the new sepsis definition (Sepsis-3) on timing of recognition in the emergency department has not been evaluated. Our study objective was to compare time to meeting systemic inflammatory response syndrome (Sepsis-2) criteria, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (Sepsis-3) criteria, and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria using electronic health record data. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. SETTING: The emergency department at the University of California, San Francisco. PATIENTS: Emergency department encounters between June 2012 and December 2016 for patients greater than or equal to 18 years old with blood cultures ordered, IV antibiotic receipt, and identification with sepsis via systemic inflammatory response syndrome or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment within 72 hours of emergency department presentation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed timestamped electronic health record data from 16,612 encounters identified as sepsis by greater than or equal to 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria or a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score greater than or equal to 2. The primary outcome was time from emergency department presentation to meeting greater than or equal to 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment greater than or equal to 2, and/or greater than or equal to 2 quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria. There were 9,087 patients (54.7%) that met systemic inflammatory response syndrome-first a median of 26 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 0-109 min), with 83.1% meeting Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria a median of 118 minutes later (interquartile range, 44-401 min). There were 7,037 patients (42.3%) that met Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-first, a median of 113 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 60-251 min). Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was met in 46.4% of patients a median of 351 minutes post-emergency department presentation (interquartile range, 67-1,165 min). Adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality were 39% greater in patients who met systemic inflammatory response syndrome-first compared with those who met Sequential Organ Failure Assessment-first (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.20-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment initially identified distinct populations. Using systemic inflammatory response syndrome resulted in earlier electronic health record sepsis identification in greater than 50% of patients. Using Sequential Organ Failure Assessment alone may delay identification. Using systemic inflammatory response syndrome alone may lead to missed sepsis presenting as acute organ dysfunction. Thus, a combination of inflammatory (systemic inflammatory response syndrome) and organ dysfunction (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) criteria may enhance timely electronic health record-based sepsis identification.

Racial differences in antibiotic prescribing by primary care pediatricians.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether racial differences exist in antibiotic prescribing among children treated by the same clinician. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 1,296,517 encounters by 208,015 children to 222 clinicians in 25 practices in 2009. Clinical, antibiotic prescribing, and demographic data were obtained from a shared electronic health record. We estimated within-clinician associations between patient race (black versus nonblack) and (1) antibiotic prescribing or (2) acute respiratory tract infection diagnosis after adjusting for potential patient-level confounders. RESULTS: Black children were less likely to receive an antibiotic prescription from the same clinician per acute visit (23.5% vs 29.0%, odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.77) or per population (0.43 vs 0.67 prescriptions/child/year, incidence rate ratio 0.64; 95% CI 0.63-0.66), despite adjustment for age, gender, comorbid conditions, insurance, and stratification by practice. Black children were also less likely to receive diagnoses that justified antibiotic treatment, including acute otitis media (8.7% vs 10.7%, OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.75-0.82), acute sinusitis (3.6% vs 4.4%, OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86), and group A streptococcal pharyngitis (2.3% vs 3.7%, OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.55-0.66). When an antibiotic was prescribed, black children were less likely to receive broad-spectrum antibiotics at any visit (34.0% vs 36.9%, OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.93) and for acute otitis media (31.7% vs 37.8%, OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.68-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: When treated by the same clinician, black children received fewer antibiotic prescriptions, fewer acute respiratory tract infection diagnoses, and a lower proportion of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions than nonblack children. Reasons for these differences warrant further study.