Antibiotic stewardship to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in integrated academic health-system urgent care clinics.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and implement antibiotic stewardship activities in urgent care targeting non-antibiotic-appropriate acute respiratory tract infections (ARIs) that also reduces overall antibiotic prescribing and maintains patient satisfaction. PATIENTS AND SETTING: Patients and clinicians at the urgent care clinics of an integrated academic health system. INTERVENTION AND METHODS: The stewardship activities started in fiscal 2020 and included measure development, comparative feedback, and clinician and patient education. We measured antibiotic prescribing in fiscal years 2019, 2020, and 2021 for the stewardship targets, potential diagnosis-shifting visits, and overall. We also collected patient satisfaction data for ARI visits. RESULTS: From FY19 to FY21, 576,609 patients made 1,358,816 visits to 17 urgent care clinics, including 105,781 visits for which stewardship measures were applied and 149,691 visits for which diagnosis shifting measures were applied. The antibiotic prescribing rate decreased for stewardship-measure visits from 34% in FY19 to 12% in FY21 (absolute change, -22%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -23% to -22%). The antibiotic prescribing rate decreased for diagnosis-shifting visits from 63% to 35% (-28%; 95% CI, -28% to -27%), and the antibiotic prescribing rate decreased overall from 30% to 10% (-20%; 95% CI, -20% to -20%). The patient satisfaction rate increased from 83% in FY19 to 89% in FY20 and FY21. There was no significant association between antibiotic prescribing rates of individual clinicians and ARI visit patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Although it was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, an ambulatory antimicrobial stewardship program that focused on improving non-antibiotic-appropriate ARI prescribing was associated with decreased prescribing for (1) the stewardship target, (2) a diagnosis shifting measure, and (3) overall antibiotic prescribing. Patient satisfaction at ARI visits increased over time and was not associated with clinicians' antibiotic prescribing rates.

Development of a novel clinical decision support tool for diabetes prevention and feasibility of its implementation in primary care.

Prediabetes impacts 88 million U.S. adults, yet uptake of evidence-based treatment with intensive lifestyle interventions and metformin remains exceedingly low. After incorporating feedback from 15 primary care providers collected during semi-structured interviews, we developed a novel Prediabetes Clinical Decision Support (PreDM CDS) from August 2019 to February 2020. This tool included order options enabling prediabetes management in a single location within the electronic health record. We conducted a retrospective observational study examining the feasibility of implementing this tool at Erie Family Health Centers, a large community health center, examining its use and related outcomes among patients for whom it was used vs not. Overall, 7,424 eligible patients were seen during the implementation period (February 2020 to August 2021), and the PreDM CDS was used for 108 (1.5 %). Using the PreDM CDS was associated with higher rates of hemoglobin A1c orders (70.4 % vs 22.2 %; p < 0.001), lifestyle counseling (38.0 % vs 7.8 %; p < 0.001), and metformin prescription orders (5.6 % vs 2.6 %; p = 0.06). Exploratory analyses revealed small, nonsignificant weight loss among patients for whom the PreDM CDS was used. This study demonstrates the feasibility of developing and implementing the PreDM CDS in primary care. Its low use was likely related to not imposing an interruptive 'pop-up' alert, as well as major changes in workflows and clinical priorities during the Covid-19 pandemic. Use of the tool was associated with improved process outcomes. Future efforts with the PreDM CDS should follow standard CDS implementation processes that were not possible due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Awareness, Attitudes, and Actions Related to COVID-19 Among Adults With Chronic Conditions at the Onset of the U.S. Outbreak: A Cross-sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: The evolving outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is requiring social distancing and other measures to protect public health. However, messaging has been inconsistent and unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine COVID-19 awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and related behaviors among U.S. adults who are more vulnerable to complications of infection because of age and comorbid conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey linked to 3 active clinical trials and 1 cohort study. SETTING: 5 academic internal medicine practices and 2 federally qualified health centers. PATIENTS: 630 adults aged 23 to 88 years living with 1 or more chronic conditions. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A fourth (24.6%) of participants were "very worried" about getting the coronavirus. Nearly a third could not correctly identify symptoms (28.3%) or ways to prevent infection (30.2%). One in 4 adults (24.6%) believed that they were "not at all likely" to get the virus, and 21.9% reported that COVID-19 had little or no effect on their daily routine. One in 10 respondents was very confident that the federal government could prevent a nationwide outbreak. In multivariable analyses, participants who were black, were living below the poverty level, and had low health literacy were more likely to be less worried about COVID-19, to not believe that they would become infected, and to feel less prepared for an outbreak. Those with low health literacy had greater confidence in the federal government response. LIMITATION: Cross-sectional study of adults with underlying health conditions in 1 city during the initial week of the COVID-19 U.S. outbreak. CONCLUSION: Many adults with comorbid conditions lacked critical knowledge about COVID-19 and, despite concern, were not changing routines or plans. Noted disparities suggest that greater public health efforts may be needed to mobilize the most vulnerable communities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

The protocol of improving safe antibiotic prescribing in telehealth: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The CDC estimates that over 40% of Urgent Care visits are for acute respiratory infections (ARI), more than half involving inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions. Previous randomized trials in primary care clinics resulted in reductions in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, but antibiotic stewardship interventions in telehealth have not been systematically assessed. To better understand how best to decrease inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in telehealth, we are conducting a large randomized quality improvement trial testing both patient- and physician-facing feedback and behavioral nudges embedded in the electronic health record. METHODS: Teladoc® clinicians are assigned to one of 9 arms in a 3 × 3 randomized trial. Each clinician is assigned to one of 3 Commitment groups (Public, Private, Control) and one of 3 Performance Feedback groups (Benchmark Peer Comparison, Trending, Control). After randomly selecting ⅓ of states and associated clinicians required for patient-facing components of the Public Commitment intervention, remaining clinicians are randomized to the Control and Private Commitment arms. Clinicians are randomized to the Performance Feedback conditions. The primary outcome is change from baseline in antibiotic prescribing rate for qualifying ARI visits. Secondary outcomes include changes in inappropriate prescribing and revisit rates. Secondary analyses include investigation of heterogeneity of treatment effects. With 1530 clinicians and an intra-clinician correlation in antibiotic prescribing rate of 0.5, we have >80% power to detect 1-7% absolute differences in antibiotic prescribing among groups. DISCUSSION: Findings from this trial may help inform telehealth stewardship strategies, determine whether significant differences exist between Commitment and Feedback interventions, and provide guidance for clinicians and patients to encourage safe and effective antibiotic use. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT05138874.

Effect of Peer Benchmarking on Specialist Electronic Consult Performance in a Los Angeles Safety-Net: a Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Since the advent of COVID-19, accelerated adoption of systems that reduce face-to-face encounters has outpaced training and best practices. Electronic consultations (eConsults), structured communications between PCPs and specialists regarding a case, have been effective in reducing face-to-face specialist encounters. As the health system rapidly adapts to multiple new practices and communication tools, new mechanisms to measure and improve performance in this context are needed. OBJECTIVE: To test whether feedback comparing physicians to top performing peers using co-specialists' ratings improves performance. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Eighty facility-specialty clusters and 214 clinicians INTERVENTION: Providers in the feedback arms were sent messages that announced their membership in an elite group of "Top Performers" or provided actionable recommendations with feedback for providers that were "Not Top Performers." MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes were changes in peer ratings in the following performance dimensions after feedback was received: (1) elicitation of information from primary care practitioners; (2) adherence to institutional clinical guidelines; (3) agreement with peer's medical decision-making; (4) educational value; (5) relationship building. KEY RESULTS: Specialists showed significant improvements on 3 of the 5 consultation performance dimensions: medical decision-making (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.14, p<.05), educational value (1.86, 1.17-2.96) and relationship building (1.63, 1.13-2.35) (both p<.01). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has shed light on clinicians' commitment to professionalism and service as we rapidly adapt to changing paradigms. Interventions that appeal to professional norms can help improve the efficacy of new systems of practice. We show that specialists' performance can be measured and improved with feedback using aspirational norms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03784950.

A Framework for Transforming Primary Care Health Care Professions Education and Training to Promote Health Equity.

A diverse and well-trained, distributed and resourced primary care workforce is essential for advancing health equity. However, few standardized models exist to guide health care professions education (HCPE) on core competencies regarding understanding and effectively addressing social determinants of health, social injustice, structural barriers, and the high burden of health needs in marginalized populations. We propose a framework with domains of policies and incentives, enabling institutional climate, educational content and integration, and community-orientation and community engagement. The framework encompasses inter-disciplinary team-based care and immersive community experiences to equip learners with cognitive skills and knowledge needed to understand and address unmet needs and ensure equitable access to the entire continuum of care. Research is needed to understand barriers and promoters of a health equity-guided HCPE, and standards for theory-driven curricular contents and metrics to evaluate and track progress. Multisector collaborations and demonstration projects may help guide standardized training on advancing health equity.

Changes in COVID-19 Knowledge, Beliefs, Behaviors, and Preparedness Among High-Risk Adults from the Onset to the Acceleration Phase of the US Outbreak.

BACKGROUND: The US outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) accelerated rapidly over a short time to become a public health crisis. OBJECTIVE: To assess how high-risk adults' COVID-19 knowledge, beliefs, behaviors, and sense of preparedness changed from the onset of the US outbreak (March 13-20, 2020) to the acceleration phase (March 27-April 7, 2020). DESIGN: Longitudinal, two-wave telephone survey. PARTICIPANTS: 588 predominately older adults with ≥ 1 chronic condition recruited from 4 active, federally funded studies in Chicago. MAIN MEASURES: Self-reported knowledge of COVID-19 symptoms and prevention, related beliefs, behaviors, and sense of preparedness. KEY RESULTS: From the onset to the acceleration phase, participants increasingly perceived COVID-19 to be a serious public health threat, reported more changes to their daily routine and plans, and reported greater preparedness. The proportion of respondents who believed they were "not at all likely" to get the virus decreased slightly (24.9 to 22.4%; p = 0.04), but there was no significant change in the proportion of those who were unable to accurately identify ways to prevent infection (29.2 to 25.7%; p 0.14). In multivariable analyses, black adults and those with lower health literacy were more likely to report less perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 (black adults: relative risk (RR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.44, p = 0.02; marginal health literacy: RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.26-3.07, p < 0.01). Individuals with low health literacy remained more likely to feel unprepared for the outbreak (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.11-2.92, p = 0.02) and to express confidence in the federal government response (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.49-3.00, p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: Adults at higher risk for COVID-19 continue to lack critical knowledge about prevention. While participants reported greater changes to daily routines and plans, disparities continued to exist in perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 and in preparedness. Public health messaging to date may not be effectively reaching vulnerable communities.

Knowledge and Behaviors of Adults with Underlying Health Conditions During the Onset of the COVID-19 U.S. Outbreak: The Chicago COVID-19 Comorbidities Survey.

Accurate understanding of COVID-19 safety recommendations early in the outbreak was complicated by inconsistencies in public health and media messages. We sought to characterize high-risk adults' knowledge of COVID-19 symptoms, prevention strategies, and prevention behaviors. We used data from the Chicago COVID-19 Comorbidities (C3) survey collected between March 13 thru March 20, 2020. A total of 673 predominately older adults with ≥ 1 chronic condition completed the telephone interview. Knowledge was assessed by asking participants to name three symptoms of COVID-19 and three actions to prevent infection. Participants were then asked if and how they had changed plans due to coronavirus. Most participants could identify three symptoms (71.0%) and three preventive actions (69.2%). Commonly reported symptoms included: fever (78.5%), cough (70.6%), and shortness of breath (45.2%); preventive actions included: washing hands (86.5%) and social distancing (86.2%). More than a third of participants reported social distancing themselves (38.3%), and 28.8% reported obtaining prescription medication to prepare for the outbreak. In multivariable analyses, no participant characteristics were associated with COVID-19 knowledge. Women were more likely than men, and Black adults were less likely than White adults to report practicing social distancing. Individuals with low health literacy were less likely to report obtaining medication supplies. In conclusion, though most higher-risk individuals were aware of social distancing as a prevention strategy early in the outbreak, less than half reported enacting it, and racial disparities were apparent. Consistent messaging and the provision of tangible resources may improve future adherence to safety recommendations.