Therapeutic and Economic Benefits of Service Dogs Versus Emotional Support Dogs for Veterans With PTSD.

OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to assess the therapeutic and economic benefits of service dogs versus emotional support dogs for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: Veterans with PTSD (N=227) participating in a multicenter trial were randomly assigned to receive a service or emotional support dog; 181 veterans received a dog and were followed up for 18 months. Primary outcomes included overall functioning (assessed with World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale II [WHODAS 2.0]) and quality of life (Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12]). Secondary outcomes included PTSD symptoms (PTSD Checklist for DSM-5), suicidal ideation, depression, sleep quality, health care costs and utilization, medication adherence, employment, and productivity. RESULTS: Participants paired with a dog had a mean±SD age of 50.6±13.6 years (range 22-79), and most were male (80%), White (66%), and non-Hispanic (91%). Adjusted linear mixed repeated-measures models indicated no difference between the two groups on WHODAS 2.0 or VR-12 scores. Participants with service dogs had a 3.7-point greater reduction in PTSD symptoms versus participants with emotional support dogs (p=0.036). No reduced health care utilization or cost was associated with receiving a service dog. Veterans with service dogs had an increase of 10 percentage points in antidepressant adherence compared with those with emotional support dogs (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both groups appeared to benefit from having a service or emotional support dog. No significant differences in improved functioning or quality of life were observed between the groups. Those in the service dog group had a greater reduction in PTSD symptoms and better antidepressant adherence, improvements that should be explored further.

The Urine Albumin-to-Creatinine Ratio and Kidney Function after Nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: Patients with kidney cancer are at risk for chronic kidney disease after radical and partial nephrectomy. We determined if the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio is independently associated with progressive chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a cohort study based within a large, integrated health care system. We identified patients who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy from 2004 to 2014 with urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio measured in the 12 months before surgery. We fit multivariable models to determine if the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio was associated with the time to chronic kidney disease progression (defined as reaching stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 30 ml/minute/1.73 m2). We performed a parallel analysis measuring the time to stage 3b, 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 45 ml/minute/1.73 m2) among patients with normal or near normal preoperative kidney function (estimated glomerular filtration rate 60 ml/minute/1.73 m2 or greater). We also examined the association between urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio and survival. RESULTS: A total of 1,930 patients underwent radical or partial nephrectomy and had preoperative urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio and preoperative and postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate. Of these patients 658 (34%) and 157 (8%) had moderate (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30 to 300 mg/gm) or severe albuminuria (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio greater than 300 mg/gm), respectively. Albuminuria severity was independently associated with progressive chronic kidney disease after radical (moderate albuminuria HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2.2; severe albuminuria HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.7-3.1) and partial nephrectomy (moderate albuminuria HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.7; severe albuminuria HR 4.3, 95% CI 2.7-7.0). Albuminuria was also associated with survival following radical and partial nephrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing radical or partial nephrectomy the severity of albuminuria can stratify risk of progressive chronic kidney disease.

Contemporary Use of Partial Nephrectomy: Are Older Patients With Impaired Kidney Function Being Left Behind?

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patient factors, such as age and preoperative kidney function, were associated with receipt of partial nephrectomy in a national integrated healthcare system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients treated with a radical or partial nephrectomy from 2002 to 2014 in the Veterans Health Administration. We examined associations among patient age, sex, race or ethnicity, multimorbidity, baseline kidney function, tumor characteristics, and receipt of partial nephrectomy. We estimated the odds of receiving a partial nephrectomy and assessed interactions between covariates and the year of surgery to explore whether patient factors associated with partial nephrectomy changed over time. RESULTS: In our cohort of 14,186 patients, 4508 (31.2%) received a partial nephrectomy. Use of partial nephrectomy increased from 17% in 2002 to 32% in 2008 and to 38% in 2014. Patient race or ethnicity, age, tumor stage, and year of surgery were independently associated with receipt of partial nephrectomy. Black veterans had significantly increased odds of receipt of partial nephrectomy, whereas older patients had significantly reduced odds. Partial nephrectomy utilization increased for all groups over time, but older patients and patients with worse baseline kidney function showed the least increase in odds of partial nephrectomy. CONCLUSION: Although the utilization of partial nephrectomy increased for all groups, the greatest increase occurred in the youngest patients and those with the highest baseline kidney function. These trends warrant further investigation to ensure that patients at the highest risk of impaired kidney function are considered for partial nephrectomy whenever possible.

Evaluating the implementation of a national disclosure policy for large-scale adverse events in an integrated health care system: identification of gaps and successes.

BACKGROUND: Many healthcare organizations have developed disclosure policies for large-scale adverse events, including the Veterans Health Administration (VA). This study evaluated VA's national large-scale disclosure policy and identifies gaps and successes in its implementation. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with leaders, hospital employees, and patients at nine sites to elicit their perceptions of recent large-scale adverse events notifications and the national disclosure policy. Data were coded using the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: We conducted 97 interviews. Insights included how to handle the communication of large-scale disclosures through multiple levels of a large healthcare organization and manage ongoing communications about the event with employees. Of the 5 CFIR constructs and 26 sub-constructs assessed, seven were prominent in interviews. Leaders and employees specifically mentioned key problem areas involving 1) networks and communications during disclosure, 2) organizational culture, 3) engagement of external change agents during disclosure, and 4) a need for reflecting on and evaluating the policy implementation and disclosure itself. Patients shared 5) preferences for personal outreach by phone in place of the current use of certified letters. All interviewees discussed 6) issues with execution and 7) costs of the disclosure. CONCLUSIONS: CFIR analysis reveals key problem areas that need to be addresses during disclosure, including: timely communication patterns throughout the organization, establishing a supportive culture prior to implementation, using patient-approved, effective communications strategies during disclosures; providing follow-up support for employees and patients, and sharing lessons learned.

Multimorbidity and healthcare utilisation among high-cost patients in the US Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between multimorbidity and healthcare utilisation patterns among the highest cost patients in a large, integrated healthcare system. DESIGN: In this retrospective cross-sectional study of all patients in the U.S. Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System, we aggregated costs of individuals' outpatient and inpatient care, pharmacy services and VA-sponsored contract care received in 2010. We assessed chronic condition prevalence, multimorbidity as measured by comorbidity count, and multisystem multimorbidity (number of body systems affected by chronic conditions) among the 5% highest cost patients. Using multivariate regression, we examined the association between multimorbidity and healthcare utilisation and costs, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, marital status, homelessness and health insurance status. SETTING: USA VA Health Care System. PARTICIPANTS: 5.2 million VA patients. MEASURES: Annual total costs; absolute and share of costs generated through outpatient, inpatient, pharmacy and VA-sponsored contract care; number of visits to primary, specialty and mental healthcare; number of emergency department visits and hospitalisations. RESULTS: The 5% highest cost patients (n=261,699) accounted for 47% of total VA costs. Approximately two-thirds of these patients had chronic conditions affecting ≥3 body systems. Patients with cancer and schizophrenia were less likely to have documented comorbid conditions than other high-cost patients. Multimorbidity was generally associated with greater outpatient and inpatient utilisation. However, increased multisystem multimorbidity was associated with a higher outpatient share of total costs (1.6 percentage points per affected body system, p<0.01) but a lower inpatient share of total costs (-0.6 percentage points per affected body system, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Multisystem multimorbidity is common among high-cost VA patients. While some patients might benefit from disease-specific programmes, for most patients with multimorbidity there is a need for interventions that coordinate and maximise efficiency of outpatient services across multiple conditions.

Disparities in lung cancer staging with positron emission tomography in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in treatment exist for nonwhite and Hispanic patients with non-small cell lung cancer, but little is known about disparities in the use of staging tests or their underlying causes. METHODS: Prospective, observational cohort study of 3638 patients with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer from 4 large, geographically defined regions, 5 integrated health care systems, and 13 VA health care facilities. RESULTS: Median age was 69 years, 62% were men, 26% were Hispanic or nonwhite, 68% graduated high school, 50% had private insurance, and 41% received care in the VA or another integrated health care system. After adjustment, positron emission tomography (PET) use was 13% lower among nonwhites and Hispanics than non-Hispanic whites (risk ratio [RR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.97), 13% lower among those with Medicare than those with private insurance (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76-0.99), and 24% lower among those with an elementary school education than those with a graduate degree (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57-0.98). Disparate use of PET was not observed among patients who received care in an integrated health care setting, but the association between race/ethnicity and PET use was similar in magnitude across all other subgroups. Further analysis showed that income, education, insurance, and health care setting do not explain the association between race/ethnicity and PET use. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanics and nonwhites with non-small cell lung cancer are less likely to receive PET imaging. This finding is consistent across subgroups and not explained by differences in income, education, or insurance coverage.