COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity Reduces Hospitalization and Critical Care Needs Related to COVID-19: a USIDNET Report.

BACKGROUND: The CDC and ACIP recommend COVID-19 vaccination for patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEI). Not much is known about vaccine safety in IEI, and whether vaccination attenuates infection severity in IEI. OBJECTIVE: To estimate COVID-19 vaccination safety and examine effect on outcomes in patients with IEI. METHODS: We built a secure registry database in conjunction with the US Immunodeficiency Network to examine vaccination frequency and indicators of safety and effectiveness in IEI patients. The registry opened on January 1, 2022, and closed on August 19, 2022. RESULTS: Physicians entered data on 1245 patients from 24 countries. The most common diagnoses were antibody deficiencies (63.7%). At least one COVID-19 vaccine was administered to 806 patients (64.7%), and 216 patients received vaccination prior to the development of COVID-19. The most common vaccines administered were mRNA-based (84.0%). Seventeen patients were reported to seek outpatient clinic or emergency room care for a vaccine-related complication, and one patient was hospitalized for symptomatic anemia. Eight hundred twenty-three patients (66.1%) experienced COVID-19 infection. Of these, 156 patients required hospitalization (19.0%), 47 required ICU care (5.7%), and 28 died (3.4%). Rates of hospitalization (9.3% versus 24.4%, p < 0.001), ICU admission (2.8% versus 7.6%, p = 0.013), and death (2.3% versus 4.3%, p = 0.202) in patients who had COVID-19 were lower in patients who received vaccination prior to infection. In adjusted logistic regression analysis, not having at least one COVID-19 vaccine significantly increased the odds of hospitalization and ICU admission. CONCLUSION: Vaccination for COVID-19 in the IEI population appears safe and attenuates COVID-19 severity.

Acceptability and Adherence to Home, Kiosk, and Clinic Blood Pressure Measurement Compared to 24-H Ambulatory Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends measuring blood pressure (BP) outside of clinic/office settings. While various options are available, including home devices, BP kiosks, and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), understanding patient acceptability and adherence is a critical factor for implementation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the acceptability and adherence of clinic, home, kiosk, and ABPM measurement. DESIGN: Comparative diagnostic accuracy study which randomized adults to one of three BP measurement arms: clinic, home, and kiosk. ABPM was conducted on all participants. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (18-85 years) receiving care at 12 Kaiser Permanente Washington primary care clinics (Washington State, USA) with a high BP (≥ 138 mmHg systolic or ≥ 88 mmHg diastolic) in the electronic health record with no hypertension diagnosis and on no hypertensive medications and with high BP at a research screening visit. MEASURES: Patient acceptability was measured using a validated survey which was used to calculate an overall acceptability score (range 1-7) at baseline, after completing their assigned BP measurement intervention, and after completing ABPM. Adherence was defined based on the pre-specified number of BP measurements completed. KEY RESULTS: Five hundred ten participants were randomized (mean age 59 years), with mean BP of 150/88. Overall acceptability score was highest (i.e. most acceptable) for Home BP (mean 6.2, SD 0.7) and lowest (least acceptable) for ABPM (mean 5.0, SD 1.0); scores were intermediate for Clinic (5.5, SD 1.1) and Kiosk (5.4, SD 1.0). Adherence was higher for Home (154/170, 90.6%) and Clinic (150/172, 87.2%) than for Kiosk (114/168, 67.9%)). The majority of participants (467/510, 91.6%) were adherent to ABPM. CONCLUSIONS: Participants found home BP measurement most acceptable followed by clinic, BP kiosks, and ABPM. Our findings, coupled with recent evidence regarding the accuracy of home BP measurement, further support the routine use of home-based BP measurement in primary care practice in the US. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130257 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03130257.

Online Education in Allergy and Immunology: An Update to Conferences Online in Allergy (COLA).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Online resources have become an essential component of medical education. We describe here our long standing but unique approach to providing online education in the specialty of allergy and immunology and its impact.  RECENT FINDINGS: In this article, we report the process and updates to our online conferencing curriculum known as Conferences Online in Allergy (COLA). The program was developed at Children's Mercy Kansas City almost two decades ago for the utilization of fellows in training, as well as practicing allergists. Since its inception viewership has continued to grow. COLA has served as a significant resource for both the new and practicing allergists. With rapidly continuing advancements in medical knowledge and technology, coupled with the aftereffects of a pandemic and remote learning, COLA will continue to play a significant role in allergy and immunology medical education.

Barriers and facilitators to the inclusion of deaf people in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This article discusses the barriers that prevent deaf people from participating in clinical trials and offers recommendations to overcome these barriers and ensure equal access to study participation. METHODS: Between April and May 2022, we conducted six focus groups with 20 deaf adults who use American Sign Language, all of whom had previous experience as research study participants. Focus group prompts queried community awareness of clinical trial opportunities, barriers and facilitators to deaf people's participation in clinical trials, and recommended resources to improve clinical trial access. This qualitative focus group data is supplemented by survey data gathered from 40 principal investigators and clinical research coordinators between November 2021 and December 2021. The survey queried researchers' prior experiences with enrolling deaf participants in clinical trials and strategies they endorse for enrollment of deaf participants in future clinical trials. RESULTS: Focus group participants unanimously agreed that, compared to the general hearing population, deaf sign language users lack equivalent access to clinical trial participation. Reported barriers included lack of awareness of clinical trial opportunities, mistrust of hearing researchers, and refusal by clinical trial staff to provide accessible communication (e.g. denial of requests for sign language interpreters). Survey data from 40 principal investigators and clinical research coordinators corroborated these barriers. For example, only 2 out of 40 survey respondents had ever enrolled a deaf person in a clinical trial. Respondents indicated that the most helpful strategies for including deaf sign language users in future clinical trials would be assistance with making recruitment information accessible to deaf sign language users and assistance in identifying qualified interpreters to hire to help facilitate the informed consent process. CONCLUSION: The lack of communication accessibility is the most common factor preventing deaf sign language users from participating in clinical trials. This article provides recommendations for hearing researchers to improve deaf people's access to clinical trials moving forward, drawing from mixed-methods data.

Quantifying head impact biomechanical differences between commonly employed cleaning levels: a critical research interpretation consideration.

INTRODUCTION: Wearable accelerometry devices quantify on-field frequency and severity of head impacts to further improve sport safety. Commonly employed post-data collection cleaning techniques may affect these outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare game impact rates and magnitudes between three different cleaning levels (Level-1: impacts recorded within start and end times, Level-2: impacts during pauses/breaks removed, Level-3: video verified) for male youth tackle football. METHODS: Participants (n = 23, age = 10.9 ± 0.3 yrs, height = 150.0 ± 8.3 cm, mass = 41.6 ± 8.4 kg) wore Triax SIM-G sensors throughout Fall 2019. Impact rates, ratios (IRRs), and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were used to compare levels. Random-effects general linear models were used to compare peak linear acceleration (PLA;g) and angular velocity (PAV;rads/s). RESULTS: Level-1 resulted in higher impact rates (4.57; 95%CI = 4.14-5.05) compared to Level-2 (3.09; 95%CI = 2.80-3.42; IRR = 1.48; 95%CI = 1.34-1.63) and Level-3 datasets (2.56; 95%CI = 2.30-2.85; IRR = 1.78; 95%CI = 1.60-1.98). Level-2 had higher impact rates compared to Level-3 (1.21; 95%CI = 1.08-1.35). Level-1 resulted in higher PAV than Level-2 and Level-3 (p < 0.001) datasets. PLA did not differ across datasets (p = 0.296). CONCLUSIONS: Head impact data should be filtered of pauses/breaks, and does not substantially differ outcome estimates compared to time-intensive video verification.

Application of the truth and reconciliation model to meaningfully engage deaf sign language users in the research process.

OBJECTIVES: One of the most underrepresented public health populations is the U.S. Deaf community-a minority group of 500,000 + individuals who communicate using American Sign Language (ASL). Research on Deaf health outcomes is significantly lacking due to inaccessible research procedures and mistrust of researchers that stems from historical mistreatment of Deaf people (i.e., Audism). METHODS: Following the Truth and Reconciliation Model, we hosted three Deaf community forums between October and November 2016 across New England. We invited attendees to share their experiences in the research world and make recommendations about how researchers can better include Deaf people in their studies. A select group of hearing researchers served as representatives of the research community and to issue a formal apology on behalf of this community. RESULTS: Forum attendees (n = 22; 5% racial/ethnic minority; 59% female) emphasized the following themes: Research conducted within general population samples is not an activity in which Deaf people can or will be included; a general mistrust of hearing people, including hearing researchers; researchers' frequent failure to communicate study results back to the Deaf community or the community-at-large; and a tendency of researchers to directly benefit from data provided by Deaf participants, without making any subsequent efforts to return to the community to give back or provide useful intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Many injustices and forms of mistreatment are still ongoing; therefore, we recognize that our team's efforts to foster an open dialogue between the research community and the Deaf community must be an ongoing, iterative practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Strategies to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening With Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Kits: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Optimal strategies for increasing cervical cancer screening may differ by patient screening history and health care setting. Mailing human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kits to individuals who are overdue for screening increases adherence; however, offering self-sampling kits to screening-adherent individuals has not been evaluated in the US. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of direct-mail and opt-in approaches for offering HPV self-sampling kits to individuals by cervical cancer screening history (screening-adherent and currently due, overdue, or unknown). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Washington, a US integrated health care delivery system. Individuals aged 30 to 64 years with female sex, a primary care clinician, and no hysterectomy were identified through electronic health records (EHRs) and enrolled between November 20, 2020, and January 28, 2022, with follow-up through July 29, 2022. Interventions: Individuals stratified as due (eg, at the time of randomization, these individuals have been previously screened and are due for their next screening in ≤3 months) were randomized to receive usual care (patient reminders and clinician EHR alerts [n = 3671]), education (usual care plus educational materials about screening [n = 3960]), direct mail (usual care plus educational materials and a mailed self-sampling kit [n = 1482]), or to opt in (usual care plus educational materials and the option to request a kit [n = 3956]). Individuals who were overdue for screening were randomized to receive usual care (n = 5488), education (n = 1408), or direct mail (n = 1415). Individuals with unknown history for screening were randomized to receive usual care (n = 2983), education (n = 3486), or to opt in (n = 3506). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was screening completion within 6 months. Primary analyses compared direct-mail or opt-in participants with individuals randomized to the education group. Results: The intention-to-treat analyses included 31 355 randomized individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.9 [10.4] years). Among those who were due for screening, compared with receiving education alone (1885 [47.6%]), screening completion was 14.1% (95% CI, 11.2%-16.9%) higher in the direct-mail group (914 [61.7%]) and 3.5% (95% CI, 1.2%-5.7%) higher in the opt-in group (2020 [51.1%]). Among individuals who were overdue, screening completion was 16.9% (95% CI, 13.8%-20.0%) higher in the direct-mail group (505 [35.7%]) compared with education alone (264 [18.8%]). Among those with unknown history, screening was 2.2% (95% CI, 0.5%-3.9%) higher in the opt-in group (634 [18.1%]) compared with education alone (555 [15.9%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Within a US health care system, direct-mail self-sampling increased cervical cancer screening by more than 14% in individuals who were due or overdue for cervical cancer screening. The opt-in approach minimally increased screening. To increase screening adherence, systems implementing HPV self-sampling should prioritize direct-mail outreach for individuals who are due or overdue for screening. For individuals with unknown screening history, testing alternative outreach approaches and additional efforts to document screening history are warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04679675.

A Centralized Program with Stepped Support Increases Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening Over 9 Years: a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening over many years is required to optimize colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a CRC screening intervention on adherence to CRC screening over 9 years. DESIGN: Randomized trial. SETTING: Integrated health care system in Washington state. PARTICIPANTS: Between August 2008 and November 2009, 4653 adults in a Washington state integrated health care system aged 50-74 due for CRC screening were randomized to usual care (UC; N =1163) or UC plus study interventions (interventions: N = 3490). INTERVENTIONS: Years 1 and 2: (arm 1) UC or this plus study interventions; (arm 2) mailed fecal tests or information on scheduling colonoscopy; (arm 3) mailings plus brief telephone assistance; or (arm 4) mailings and assistance plus nurse navigation. In year 3, stepped-intensity participants (arms 2, 3, and 4 combined) still eligible for screening were randomized to either stopped or continued interventions in years 3 and 5-9. MAIN MEASURES: Time in adherence to CRC testing over 9 years (covered time, primary outcome), and percent with no CRC testing in participants assigned to any intervention compared to UC only. Poisson regression models estimated incidence rate ratios for covered time, adjusting for patient characteristics and accounting for variable follow-up time. KEY RESULTS: Compared to UC, intervention participants had 21% more covered time over 9 years (57.5% vs. 69.1%; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.16-1.25, P<0.001). Fecal testing accounted for almost all additional covered time among intervention patients. Compared to UC, intervention participants were also more likely to have completed at least one CRC screening test over 9 years or until censorship (88.6% vs. 80.6%, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An outreach program that included mailed fecal tests and phone follow-up led to increased adherence to CRC testing and fewer age-eligible individuals without any CRC testing over 9 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Systems of Support (SOS) to Increase Colon Cancer Screening and Follow-up (SOS), NCT00697047, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00697047.

Clinic, Home, and Kiosk Blood Pressure Measurements for Diagnosing Hypertension: a Randomized Diagnostic Study.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends blood pressure (BP) measurements using 24-h ambulatory monitoring (ABPM) or home BP monitoring before making a new hypertension diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: Compare clinic-, home-, and kiosk-based BP measurement to ABPM for diagnosing hypertension. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Diagnostic study in 12 Washington State primary care centers, with participants aged 18-85 years without diagnosed hypertension or prescribed antihypertensive medications, with elevated BP in clinic. INTERVENTIONS: Randomization into one of three diagnostic regimens: (1) clinic (usual care follow-up BPs); (2) home (duplicate BPs twice daily for 5 days); or (3) kiosk (triplicate BPs on 3 days). All participants completed ABPM at 3 weeks. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was difference between ABPM daytime and clinic, home, and kiosk mean systolic BP. Differences in diastolic BP, sensitivity, and specificity were secondary outcomes. KEY RESULTS: Five hundred ten participants (mean age 58.7 years, 80.2% white) with 434 (85.1%) included in primary analyses. Compared to daytime ABPM, adjusted mean differences in systolic BP were clinic (-4.7mmHg [95% confidence interval -7.3, -2.2]; P<.001); home (-0.1mmHg [-1.6, 1.5];P=.92); and kiosk (9.5mmHg [7.5, 11.6];P<.001). Differences for diastolic BP were clinic (-7.2mmHg [-8.8, -5.5]; P<.001); home (-0.4mmHg [-1.4, 0.7];P=.52); and kiosk (5.0mmHg [3.8, 6.2]; P<.001). Sensitivities for clinic, home, and kiosk compared to ABPM were 31.1% (95% confidence interval, 22.9, 40.6), 82.2% (73.8, 88.4), and 96.0% (90.0, 98.5), and specificities 79.5% (64.0, 89.4), 53.3% (38.9, 67.2), and 28.2% (16.4, 44.1), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Single health care organization and limited race/ethnicity representation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to ABPM, mean BP was significantly lower for clinic, significantly higher for kiosk, and without significant differences for home. Clinic BP measurements had low sensitivity for detecting hypertension. Findings support utility of home BP monitoring for making a new diagnosis of hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130257 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03130257.

Practice patterns and outcomes associated with intravenous albumin in patients with cirrhosis and acute kidney injury.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines recommend albumin as the plasma-expander of choice for acute kidney injury (AKI) in cirrhosis. However, the impact of these recommendations on patient outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to determine the practice-patterns and outcomes associated with albumin use in a large, nationwide-US cohort of hospitalized cirrhotics with AKI. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in hospitalized cirrhotics with AKI using Cerner-Health-Facts database from January 2009 to March 2018. 6786 were included for analysis on albumin-practice-patterns, and 4126 had available outcomes data. Propensity-score-adjusted model was used to determine the association between albumin use, AKI-recovery and in-hospital survival. RESULTS: Median age was 61-years (60% male, 70% white), median serum-creatinine was 1.8 mg/dL and median Model for End-stage Liver Disease Sodium (MELD-Na) score was 24. Albumin was given to 35% of patients, of which 50% received albumin within 48-hours of AKI-onset, and 17% received appropriate weight-based dosing. Albumin was used more frequently in patients with advanced complications of cirrhosis, higher MELD-Na scores and patients admitted to urban-teaching hospitals. After propensity-matching and multivariable adjustment, albumin use was not associated with AKI-recovery (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% confidence-interval [CI]: 0.59-1.07, P = .130) or in-hospital survival (OR 0.76 [95% CI: 0.46-1.25], P = .280), compared with crystalloids. Findings were unchanged in subgroup analyses of patients with varying cirrhosis complications and disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: USA hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and AKI frequently do not receive intravenous albumin, and albumin use was not associated with improved clinical outcomes. Prospective randomised trials are direly needed to evaluate the impact of albumin in cirrhotics with AKI.

Does mailing unsolicited HPV self-sampling kits to women overdue for cervical cancer screening impact uptake of other preventive health services in a United States integrated delivery system?

Women overdue for cervical cancer screening often have other preventive care gaps. We examined whether mailing unsolicited human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kits to increase cervical cancer screening impacted receipt of other preventive services women were due for: mammography, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, influenza vaccination, depression screening, and diabetic HbA1c monitoring. From 2014 to 2016, 16,590 underscreened women were randomized to receive a mailed kit or usual care Pap reminders within Kaiser Permanente Washington. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of preventive services receipt within 12-months between the intervention vs. control arms, and within the intervention arm (comparing those returning a kit vs. attending Pap vs. nothing), adjusting models for demographic variables. There were no significant between-arm differences in uptake of any of the preventive services: intervention vs. control: mammography OR = 1.01 (95% confidence interval:0.88-1.17), CRC screening OR = 0.98 (0.86-1.13), influenza vaccination OR = 0.99 (0.92-1.06), depression screening OR = 1.07 (0.99-1.16), HbA1c OR = 0.84 (0.62-1.13). Within the intervention arm, preventive services uptake was higher in women who completed cervical cancer screening vs. did not, with stronger effects for women who attended Pap: Pap vs. nothing: mammography OR = 11.81 (8.11-17.19), CRC screening OR = 7.31 (5.57-9.58), influenza vaccination OR = 2.06 (1.82-2.32), depression screening OR = 1.79 (1.57-2.05), HbA1c OR = 3.35 (1.49-7.52); kit vs. nothing: mammography OR = 2.26 (1.56-3.26), CRC screening OR = 5.05 (3.57-7.14), influenza vaccination OR = 1.67 (1.41-1.98), depression screening OR = 1.09 (0.89-1.33), HbA1c OR = 1.23 (0.57-2.65). Mailing HPV self-sampling kits to underscreened women did not negatively impact uptake of other preventive services. However, overall preventive service uptake was the highest among women who attended in-clinic cervical cancer screening.

Concussion Characteristics and Early Postinjury Outcomes Between College Students and Intercollegiate Athletes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe concussion characteristics among general college students and compare postinjury outcomes to intercollegiate student athletes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Large university in the Southeast region of the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 179 (N=179) college students' (female=120; 67.0%; 23.9±3.9 years) and 49 athletes' (female=28, 57.1%;19.3±1.3 years) medical records were examined. Participants self-reported injury mechanism, health history information, and completed clinical assessments acutely (<7 days postinjury). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics were calculated for each group. Concussion outcomes between students with and without certain health history diagnoses were assessed using separate t tests. We conducted univariate regression analyses to determine if sex, age, and time from concussion to first clinical assessment were significant predictors of clinical outcomes. Statistically significant variables were included as covariates in a series of 1-way analyses of covariance to identify differences in balance, symptom severity, total symptom presence, and neurocognitive domain performance between students and athletes. Fisher exact tests were used to compare health history information between groups (α<0.05). RESULTS: Among students, 24% reported sustaining a concussion while participating in recreational sports, and 27% of impacts occurred to the back of the head. Students had higher proportions of headache, migraine, anxiety, and depression (P<.05). Students reported greater total symptom presence (P=.006) and performed worse on the computerized neurocognitive test domain score for complex attention (P=.015) relative to athletes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need for better access to medical care for non- National Collegiate Athletic Association sanctioned athletes because of a large proportion of concussions in the student sample being sustained during sports participation. Identifying common injury mechanisms can provide clinicians with powerful information to improve evaluation and treatment models.

Concussion reporting intentions for incoming military athletes and cadets.

Cultures of concussion reporting exist outside athletics; however, athlete-only studies dominate the literature. Comparing athletes and similar high-risk populations broadens our understanding of concussion reporting acculturation. We aimed to (1) describe and compare concussion self-report willingness as measured by anticipated concussion reporting (ACR), perceived costs, perceived rewards, brain health knowledge, and correct symptom identification for incoming cadets at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) (n = 1,136; female = 276, 24.43%) and (2) determine whether those variables predict ACR. Univariate analyses were performed to compare intercollegiate status, sex, and parental income for perceived costs and rewards, and brain health knowledge (α = 0.05) and multinomial logistic regressions to determine if those variables predicted ACR. A $40,000 parental increase in income resulted in one additional symptom identified (ß = 0.80, p = 0.026). Athletes demonstrated greater brain health knowledge by nearly one symptom correctly identified (ß = 0.98, p = 0.002); non-athletes reported significantly greater ACR (ß = 5.92; p < 0.001). Our model accounted for 37% of the variance in ACR (χ2 = 393.86, p < 0.001, Nagelkerke R2 = 0.37). Before military acculturation, athletes had less intention to seek medical care for concussion, likely from prior athletic experiences.

Under-representation of female athletes in research informing influential concussion consensus and position statements: an evidence review and synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to quantify the female athlete composition of the research data informing the most influential consensus and position statements in treating sports-related concussions. DESIGN: We identified the most influential concussion consensus and position statements through citation and documented clinician use; then, we analysed the percentage of male and female athletes from each statement's cited research. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed on 26 August 2021 with no date restrictions for English language studies using the terms 'concussion position statement' and 'concussion consensus statement.' ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Based on each statement having multiple statement editions, documented clinician use, and substantial citation advantages, we selected the National Athletic Trainers' Association (NATA, 2014), International Conference on Concussion in Sport (ICCS, 2017) and the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM, 2019). We extracted all cited studies from all three papers for assessment. For each paper analysing human data, at least two authors independently recorded female athlete participant data. RESULTS: A total of 171 distinct studies with human participants were cited by these three consensus and position papers and included in the female athlete analyses (93 NATA; 13 ICCS; 65 AMSSM). All three statements documented a significant under-representation of female athletes in their cited literature, relying on samples that were overall 80.1% male (NATA: 79.9%, ICCS: 87.8 %, AMSSM: 79.4%). Moreover, 40.4% of these studies include no female participants at all. CONCLUSION: Female athletes are significantly under-represented in the studies guiding clinical care for sport-related concussion for a broad array of sports and exercise medicine clinicians. We recommend intentional recruitment and funding of gender diverse participants in concussion studies, suggest authorship teams reflect diverse perspectives, and encourage consensus statements note when cited data under-represent non-male athletes.

Characteristics of Psychologists Assessing Deaf and Hard of Hearing Clients.

Psychological assessment plays a large part in the practice of psychology. Over the years, steps have been taken towards ensuring ethical and culturally sensitive psychological assessment for underserved populations, but little is known about the current state of the field of assessment of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) individuals. An exploratory survey of school and clinical psychologists who work with DHH clients (n = 30) was conducted to obtain a snapshot of the state of the field. The current article focuses on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical training, clinical experiences, and language abilities of clinical psychologists who work with DHH clients. Participants averaged 15 years of assessment experience and almost all participants had some type of specialized training in assessing DHH clients. More than half of participants reported their ability to use multiple languages and communication approaches as either excellent or good. Current findings were compared with a similar survey from nearly 50 years ago (Levine, E. S. (1974). Psychological tests and practices with the deaf: A survey of the state of the art. Volta Review, 76, 298-319), and significant differences were found in participants' self-reported experience with DHH clients, training, and methods of communication.

Karnofsky performance status predicts outcomes in candidates for simultaneous liver-kidney transplant.

Karnofsky performance status (KPS), a measure of physical frailty, predicts pre-transplant and post-transplant outcomes in liver transplantation, but has not been assessed in simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT). We examined the association between KPS and outcomes in SLKT waitlist registrants and recipients (2005-2018) in the UNOS database. KPS was categorized into A (able to work), B (able to provide self-care), and C (unable to provide self-care). Cox regression and competing risk analysis were used to assess the association between KPS groups and outcomes. A total of 10,785 patients were waitlisted (KPS: 19% A, 46% B, 35% C), and 5,516 underwent SLKT (12% A, 36% B, 52% C). One-year waitlist mortality was 17%, 22%, and 32% for KPS A, B, and C, respectively. In adjusted competing risk regression, KPS C was associated with increased waitlist mortality (SHR 1.15, 95%CI 1.04-1.28). One-year post-transplant survival was 92%, 91%, and 87% for KPS A, B, and C, respectively. In adjusted Cox regression, KPS C was associated with increased post-transplant mortality (HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.08-1.61). It was also associated with increased liver and kidney graft losses and with hospital length of stay. Frailty, as assessed by KPS, is associated with poor outcomes in SLKT pre- and post-transplant.

De-implementation of cervical cancer screening before age 21.

In 2012, United States consensus guidelines were modified to recommend that cervical cancer screening not begin before age 21 and, since 2014, the Health Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS), a health plan quality measurement too, has included a measure for non-recommended cervical cancer screening among females ages 16-20. Our goal was to describe prevalence over time of cervical cancer screening before age 21 following the 2012 guideline change, and provide information to help understand how rapidly new guidelines may be disseminated and implemented into clinical practice. We used longitudinal clinical and administrative data from three diverse healthcare systems in the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium to examine annual trends in screening before age 21. We identified 55,316 average-risk, screening-eligible females ages 18-20 between 2011 and 2017. For each calendar year, we estimated the proportion of females who received a Papanicolaou (Pap) test. We observed a steady decline in the proportion of females under age 21 who received a Pap test, from an average of 8.3% in 2011 to <1% in 2017 across the sites. The observed steady decline suggests growing adherence to the 2012 consensus guidelines. This trend was consistent across diverse geographic regions, healthcare systems, and patient populations, strengthening the generalizability of the results; however, since we only had 1-2 years of study data prior to the consensus guidelines, we cannot discern whether screening under age 21 was already in decline. Nonetheless, these results provide data to compare with other guideline changes to de-implement non-recommended screening practices.

Improving Quality Improvement Capacity and Clinical Performance in Small Primary Care Practices.

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to assess whether implementing 7 evidence-based strategies to build improvement capacity within smaller primary care practices was associated with changes in performance on clinical quality measures (CQMs) for cardiovascular disease. METHODS: A total of 209 practices across Washington, Oregon, and Idaho participated in a pragmatic clinical trial that focused on building quality improvement capacity as measured by a validated questionnaire, the 12-point Quality Improvement Capacity Assessment (QICA). Clinics reported performance on 3 cardiovascular CQMs-appropriate aspirin use, blood pressure (BP) control (<140/90 mm Hg), and smoking screening/cessation counseling-at baseline (2015) and follow-up (2017). Regression analyses with change in CQM as the dependent variable allowed for clustering by practice facilitator and adjusted for baseline CQM performance. RESULTS: Practices improved QICA scores by 1.44 points (95% CI, 1.20-1.68; P <.001) from an average baseline of 6.45. All 3 CQMs also improved: aspirin use by 3.98% (average baseline = 66.8%; 95% CI for change, 1.17%-6.79%; P = .006); BP control by 3.36% (average baseline = 61.5%; 95% CI for change, 1.44%-5.27%; P = .001); and tobacco screening/cessation counseling by 7.49% (average baseline = 73.8%; 95% CI for change, 4.21%-10.77%; P <.001). Each 1-point increase in QICA score was associated with a 1.25% (95% CI, 0.41%-2.09%, P = .003) improvement in BP control; the estimated likelihood of reaching a 70% BP control performance goal was 1.24 times higher (95% CI, 1.09-1.40; P <.001) for each 1-point increase in QICA. CONCLUSION: Improvements in clinic-level performance on BP control may be attributed to implementation of 7 evidence-based strategies to build quality improvement capacity. These strategies were feasible to implement in small practices over 15 months.

Number of prior concussions predict poorer concussion care seeking in military cadets.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether concussion history predicts concussion care seeking, self-management practices, or confidence to recognize/report. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional. METHODS & PROCEDURES: 706 United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) cadets completed survey items regarding concussion history (0,1,2,3+), likelihood of reporting a concussion, self-management, and confidence to recognize/report. We used multivariate ordinal and binary logistic regression models to predict responses using concussion history, sex, and race.Main outcomes & results: cadets with 1 (OR = 0.59, 95%CI:0.43-0.82), 2 (OR = 0.55, 95%CI:0.31-0.98), or 3+ (OR = 0.36, 95%CI:0.17-0.78) concussions while at USAFA had respective 41%, 45%, and 64% lower likelihood to report the concussion scenario (ref = no history, p < .001). USAFA cadets with more extensive concussion histories had higher prevalence of not seeking care for a concussion (p < .001); more strongly endorsed self-management (p = .001-0.010); and had greater confidence in their ability to recognize a concussion (p = .005), but not to report (p = .198-0.413). CONCLUSIONS: Prior concussion experiences may deter cadets from seeking medical care for future concussions. Interventions should address concussion history and clinicians should consider how the post-concussion management process might deter care seeking.

The Influence of Socioeconomic Status and Academic Standing on Concussion-Reporting Intentions and Behaviors in Collegiate Athletes.

Concussion education have served as a keystone for improving concussion reporting. Numerous factors affecting concussion reporting have been explored; however, the role of socioeconomic status (SES) in reporting has not been established. We examined the influence of SES and academic achievement (high-school grade point average [HS-GPA] and American College Testing [ACT] composite scores) on athletes' concussion-reporting intentions and behaviors. A cross-sectional study was employed among 191 athletes (94 female; age 19.3 ± 1.2 years). Athletes reported SES metrics (parental education and occupation, household income, HS-GPA, and ACT composite score) prior to their athletic season and completed a survey assessing symptom- and concussion-reporting intentions. Symptom- and concussion-reporting behaviors were assessed among athletes who experienced a concussion within the past year. SES was determined using the Hollingshead Four-Factor Index grouping athletes into SES strata. Athletes were grouped into low/high categories for academic achievement and household income variables. The 191 athletes were included for symptom- and concussion-reporting intentions analyses, while 46 and 41 were included for symptom- and concussion-reporting behavior, respectively. Nonparametric statistics with false discovery rate adjusted p values were employed. We found symptom- and concussion-reporting intentions, and symptom- and concussion-reporting behaviors were not significantly different based on SES strata (all p values ≥.64), household income (all p values ≥.64), HS-GPA (all p values ≥.24), or ACT scores (all p values ≥.25). Overall, SES and academic achievement may not play a role in understanding concussion reporting among middle- to high-SES collegiate athletes. Implementing policies targeting certain SES and academic levels might be an ineffective health care strategy for increasing reporting.