RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a leading cause of death in the USA, contributing to high expenditures near the end of life. Evidence remains lacking on whether billed advance care planning changes patterns of end-of-life healthcare utilization among patients with heart failure. Large-scale claims evaluation assessing billed advance care planning and end-of-life hospitalizations among patients with heart failure can fill evidence gaps to inform health policy and clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: Assess the association between billed advance care planning delivered and Medicare beneficiaries with heart failure upon the type and quantity of healthcare utilization in the last 30 days of life. DESIGN: This retrospective cross-sectional cohort study used Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2016 to 2020. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 48,466 deceased patients diagnosed with heart failure on Medicare. MAIN MEASURES: Billed advance care planning services between the last 12 months and last 30 days of life will serve as the exposure. The outcomes are end-of-life healthcare utilization and total expenditure in inpatient, outpatient, hospice, skilled nursing facility, and home healthcare services. KEY RESULTS: In the final cohort of 48,466 patients (median [IQR] age, 83 [76-89] years; 24,838 [51.2%] women; median [IQR] Charlson Comorbidity Index score, 4 [2-5]), 4406 patients had an advance care planning encounter. Total end-of-life expenditure among patients with billed advance care planning encounters was 19% lower (95% CI, 0.77-0.84) compared to patients without. Patients with billed advance care planning encounters had 2.65 times higher odds (95% CI, 2.47-2.83) of end-of-life outpatient utilization with a 33% higher expected total outpatient expenditure (95% CI, 1.24-1.42) compared with patients without a billed advance care planning encounter. CONCLUSIONS: Billed advance care planning delivery to individuals with heart failure occurs infrequently. Prioritizing billed advance care planning delivery to these individuals may reduce total end-of-life expenditures and end-of-life inpatient expenditures through promoting use of outpatient end-of-life services, including home healthcare and hospice.
Assuntos
Planejamento Antecipado de Cuidados , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Medicare , Assistência Terminal , Humanos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/economia , Planejamento Antecipado de Cuidados/economia , Estados Unidos , Feminino , Masculino , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medicare/economia , Estudos Transversais , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Assistência Terminal/economia , Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Importance: Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) can progress to active tuberculosis disease, causing morbidity and mortality. Objective: To review the evidence on benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of LTBI in adults to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data Sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through December 3, 2021; references; experts; literature surveillance through January 20, 2023. Study Selection: English-language studies of LTBI screening, LTBI treatment, or accuracy of the tuberculin skin test (TST) or interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs). Studies of LTBI screening and treatment for public health surveillance or disease management were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; qualitative synthesis of findings; meta-analyses conducted when a sufficient number of similar studies were available. Main Outcomes and Measures: Screening test accuracy; development of active tuberculosis disease, transmission, quality of life, mortality, and harms. Results: A total of 113 publications were included (112 studies; N = 69â¯009). No studies directly evaluated the benefits and harms of screening. Pooled estimates for sensitivity of the TST were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74-0.87) at the 5-mm induration threshold, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.87) at the 10-mm threshold, and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.46-0.74) at the 15-mm threshold. Pooled estimates for sensitivity of IGRA tests ranged from 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) to 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.92). Pooled estimates for specificity of screening tests ranged from 0.95 to 0.99. For treatment of LTBI, a large (n = 27â¯830), good-quality randomized clinical trial found a relative risk (RR) for progression to active tuberculosis at 5 years of 0.35 (95% CI, 0.24-0.52) for 24 weeks of isoniazid compared with placebo (number needed to treat, 112) and an increase in hepatotoxicity (RR, 4.59 [95% CI, 2.03-10.39]; number needed to harm, 279). A previously published meta-analysis reported that multiple regimens were efficacious compared with placebo or no treatment. Meta-analysis found greater risk for hepatotoxicity with isoniazid than with rifampin (pooled RR, 4.22 [95% CI, 2.21-8.06]; n = 7339). Conclusions and Relevance: No studies directly evaluated the benefits and harms of screening for LTBI compared with no screening. TST and IGRAs were moderately sensitive and highly specific. Treatment of LTBI with recommended regimens reduced the risk of progression to active tuberculosis. Isoniazid was associated with higher rates of hepatotoxicity than placebo or rifampin.
Assuntos
Tuberculose Latente , Programas de Rastreamento , Adulto , Humanos , Doença Hepática Induzida por Substâncias e Drogas/etiologia , Isoniazida/efeitos adversos , Isoniazida/uso terapêutico , Tuberculose Latente/diagnóstico , Tuberculose Latente/tratamento farmacológico , Tuberculose Latente/epidemiologia , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Rifampina/efeitos adversos , Rifampina/uso terapêutico , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Antituberculosos/efeitos adversos , Antituberculosos/uso terapêutico , Guias de Prática Clínica como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Euthanasia and assisted suicide laws in the Netherlands require physicians meet clinical guidelines when performing the practice to ensure death is peaceful and painless. Despite oversight by the regional review committees over each case, little research exists into the frequency of guideline deviation and the reasons for nonadherence. METHODS: Cases reported and reviewed between 2012 and 2017 that did not meet due medical care were analysed for thematic content. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 11 Dutch physicians on their experience with the clinical and pharmacological elements of euthanasia and assisted suicide, their interaction and comportment with the recommended guidelines, and reasons why guideline deviation might occur. Reported case reviews and interviews were used to obtain themes and subthemes to understand how and why deviations from clinical guidelines happened. RESULTS: Violations of due medical care were found in 42 (0.07%) of reported cases. The regional review committees found physicians in violation of due medical care mostly for inadequate confirmation of coma-induction and deviations from recommended drug dosages. Physicians reported that they rarely deviated from the guidelines, with the most common reasons being concern for the patient's family, concern over the drug efficacy, mistrust in the provided guidelines, or relying on the poor advice of pharmacists or hospital administrators. CONCLUSIONS: Deviations from the guidelines and violations of due medical care are rare, but should nonetheless be monitored and prevented. A few areas for improvement include skills training for physicians, consistency between review committee rulings, and further clarity on dosage recommendations.
Assuntos
Eutanásia/legislação & jurisprudência , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Médicos/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Suicídio Assistido/legislação & jurisprudência , Tomada de Decisões , Educação Médica , Eutanásia/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Masculino , Países Baixos , Relações Médico-Paciente , Médicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Suicídio Assistido/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Background: Addressing the critical public health crisis of substance use disorder (SUD), this study evaluates the accuracy of SUD treatment search tools, such as FindTreatment.gov, to connect patients with appropriate care. Methods: To ensure geographic diversity, we randomly selected one state from four distinct US regions (Arizona, Florida, Massachusetts, Ohio) and then randomly selected counties of varying sizes (one large, two medium, three small) within each state using a random number generator. Contact information for practices was extracted from the tools and validated through phone calls. The primary outcome measures were exact accuracy rate (wherein all information was accurate) and functional accuracy rate (wherein enough information was provided to facilitate care establishment). Results: A total of 697 practices from within ten SUD treatment search tools were assessed. Accuracy of the ten SUD treatment search tools varied considerably, with exact accuracy rates ranging from 9.1 % to 76.0 % (mean: 56.0 %) and functional accuracy rates from 50.0 % to 92.0 % (mean: 82.8 %). National tools exhibited higher accuracy for both exact accuracy rate (66.3 % v. 49.0 %; p = 0.2864) and functional accuracy rate (83.8 % v. 82.2 %; p = 0.9148) than state tools, while privately funded tools demonstrated higher accuracy for both exact accuracy rates (66.8 % v. 48.9 %; p = 0.2008) and functional accuracy rates (83.8 % v. 82.2 %; p = 0.9148), but none of these differences were statistically significant. Conclusions: This study found that SUD treatment search tools commonly list inaccurate information, underscoring the need for systematic improvements in data management and validation practices.
RESUMO
Advance care planning (ACP) supports individuals in aligning their medical care with personal values and preferences in the face of serious illness. The variety of ACP tools available reflects diverse strategies intended to facilitate these critical conversations, yet evaluations of their effectiveness often show mixed results. Following the Arskey and O'Malley framework, this scoping review aims to synthesize the range of ACP tools targeted at patients and families, highlighting their characteristics and delivery methods to better understand their impact and development over time. Studies included focused on patient-facing ACP tools across all settings and mediums. Exclusions were applied to studies solely targeting healthcare providers or those only aiming at completion of advance directives without broader ACP discussions. Searches were conducted across PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Data were extracted using a predesigned spreadsheet, capturing study population, setting, intervention modality, and intervention theme. Tools were categorized by delivery method and further analyzed through a year-wise distribution to track trends and developments. We identified 99 unique patient-facing tools, with those focusing on counseling (31) and video technologies (21) being the most prevalent while others incorporated online platforms, print materials, games, or some combination of different delivery methods. Over half the tools were designed for specific patient groups, especially for various diseases and racial or ethnic communities. Recent years showed a surge in tool variety and innovation, including integrated patient portals and psychological techniques. The review demonstrates a broad array of innovative ACP tools that facilitate personalized and effective ACP. Our findings contribute to an enhanced understanding of their utilization and potential impacts, offering valuable insights for future tool development and policy making in ACP.
Scanning the landscape of tools to assist patients with advance care planning This review investigates the variety of tools, programs, and interventions designed to help patients plan their healthcare in advance, a process known as advance care planning (ACP). ACP is crucial because it ensures individuals receive medical care aligned with their wishes, especially during serious illness or near the end of life. Our study gathered information from various sources, focusing on tools aimed directly at patients and their families. We found 99 unique tools that assist in ACP, including individual counseling sessions, video-based tools, and digital platforms. Some tools are designed specifically for certain patient groups, such as those with particular diseases or belonging to diverse racial and ethnic communities. Our review highlights the recent surge in the variety and innovation of these tools, such as integrated patient portals and methods incorporating psychological techniques, suggesting a growing effort to make ACP more accessible and tailored to individual needs. However, despite this variety, more research is needed to understand how these tools impact healthcare outcomes and how they can be effectively implemented in different care settings. Our findings aim to guide future development of ACP tools, improve their integration into healthcare practices, and ensure they meet the diverse needs of patients and families.
RESUMO
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought widespread change to health care practice and research. With heightened stress in the general population, increased unhealthy alcohol use, and added pressures on primary care practices, comes the need to better understand how we can continue practice-based research and address public health priorities amid the ongoing pandemic. The current study considers barriers and facilitators to conducting such research, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, within the context of recruiting practices for the STop UNhealthy (STUN) Alcohol Use Now trial. The STUN trial uses practice facilitation to implement screening and interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care practices across the state of North Carolina. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 15 practice coaches to discuss their recruitment experiences before and after recruitment was paused due to the pandemic. An inductive thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes. Results: Pandemic-related barriers, including challenges in staffing, finances, and new COVID-19-related workflows, were most prominent. Competing priorities, such as quality improvement measures, North Carolina's implementation of Medicaid managed care, and organizational structures hampered recruitment efforts. Coaches also described barriers specific to the project and to the topic of alcohol. Several facilitators were identified, including the rising importance of behavioral health due to the pandemic, as well as existing relationships between practice coaches and practices. Conclusions: Difficulty managing competing priorities and obstacles within existing practice infrastructure inhibit the ability to participate in practice-based research and implementation of evidence-based practices. Lessons learned from this trial may inform strategies to recruit practices into research and to gain buy-in from practices in adopting evidence-based practices more generally. Plain Language Summary: What is known: Unhealthy alcohol use is a significant public health issue, which has been exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening and brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use is an evidence-based practice shown to help reduce drinking-related behaviors, yet it remains rare in practice. What this study adds: Using a qualitative approach, we identify barriers and facilitators to recruiting primary care practices into a funded trial that uses practice facilitation to address unhealthy alcohol use. We identify general insights as well as those specific to the COVID-19 pandemic. Barriers are primarily related to competing priorities, incentives, and lack of infrastructure. Facilitators are related to framing of the project and the anticipated level and type of resources needed to address unhealthy alcohol use especially as the pandemic wanes. Implications: Our findings provide information on barriers and facilitators to recruiting primary care practices for behavioral health projects and to implementing these activities. Using our findings, we provide a discussion of suggestions for conducting these types of projects in the future which may be of interest to researchers, practice managers, and providers.