Implementation strategies to improve adoption of unmet social needs screening and referrals in care management using enabling technologies: study protocol for a cluster randomized trial.

Background Adverse social determinants of health contribute to health inequities. Practice guidelines now recommend incorporating patient unmet social needs into patient care, and payors increasingly reimburse for screening and providing related referrals to community organizations. Emergent electronic health record (EHR)-based tools can enable clinical-community linkages, but their adoption commonly faces workflow and infrastructure barriers. Targeted implementation support such as training, championship, practice facilitation, and audit and feedback, can enhance such tools' adoption, but no prior research has assessed such strategies' impact on the adoption of 'enabling technologies' supporting clinical-community linkages. This study will test whether providing targeted implementation support to safety-net primary care health center care management teams improves the sustained adoption of EHR-based enabling technologies used to 1) screen for social needs and 2) link patients to community organizations. Methods Formative evaluation of barriers and facilitators to adopting EHR-enabled social needs referrals and ascertainment of services received will include semi-structured interviews and a 'guided tour' of enabling technology used by care managers serving patients with complex health and/or social needs. A modified Delphi process conducted with care management staff and subject matter experts will then inform the development of an intervention targeting adoption of social risk EHR-enabled tools. The intervention will be piloted in three health centers, refined, then tested in a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in 20 health centers (five wedges of four health centers) that provide care management to high-risk patients with social needs. Discussion This study is among the first to evaluate an intervention designed to support care management teams' adoption of enabling technologies to increase clinical-community linkages. It was funded in September 2023 by the National Institute of Nursing Research. Formative activities will take place from January to June 2024, the intervention will be developed in July-December 2024, the pilot study will be conducted from January-March 2025, and the cluster-randomized trial will occur from July 2025 -September 2026. Study data will be analyzed and results disseminated in 2027-2028. Study results have the potential to improve clinical-community linkages and in so doing to advance health equity. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov registration # NCT06489002. Registered July 5, 2024, https//clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06489002?term=NCT06489002&rank=1.

Incident Epilepsy Among US Medicare Beneficiaries, 2019: Differences by Age, Sex, and Race/Ethnicity.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Epilepsy is common among older adults, but previous incident studies have had limited ability to make comparisons across key subgroups. We aimed to provide updated epilepsy incidence estimates among older adults, comparing across age, sex, and race/ethnicity. METHODS: Using a random sample of 4,999,999 US Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of epilepsy incidence using administrative claims for 2016-2019. Sampled beneficiaries were enrolled in the Fee-for-Service (FFS) program in each of 2016-2018 and had no epilepsy claims in those years. Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic beneficiaries were oversampled to ensure adequate cases for detailed comparisons. Incidence in 2019 was identified in the Master Beneficiary Summary File as ≥1 inpatient claim or ≥2 outpatient nondrug claims occurring at least 1 day apart (ICD-10 G40.x). Incidence models were estimated by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and combinations thereof, with adjustment for the racial/ethnic oversampling. RESULTS: We identified 20,545 incident epilepsy cases. The overall epilepsy incidence rate (IR) was 393 per 100,000 (99% CI 385-400). Incidence peaked at ages 85-89 (504 [481-529]) and was higher for men (396 [385-407]) than women (376 [366-385]). The sex difference in IRs was constant with age. Incidence was higher for non-Hispanic Black (678 [653-702]) and Hispanic (405 [384-426]), and lower for non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander (272 [239-305]) beneficiaries, compared with non-Hispanic White beneficiaries (354 [299-408]). The age-specific IRs significantly differed by race/ethnicity and sex, but only among non-Hispanic Black beneficiaries-where men had higher rates at younger ages and women at older ages. DISCUSSION: We found higher epilepsy IRs among those enrolled in the Medicare FFS system 2016-2019 than previous studies using Medicare claims data from at least a decade ago. The risk of epilepsy onset is higher for those in their late 80s, men, and non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic older adults. There is also evidence that these age-graded risks operate differently for Black men and Black women. Efforts to provide care and services that improve quality of life for older adults living with epilepsy should consider differences by multiple social characteristics simultaneously: age, sex, and race/ethnicity.

Excess prevalence of preexisting chronic conditions in older adults with incident epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Prior studies have examined chronic conditions in older adults with prevalent epilepsy, but rarely among those with incident epilepsy. Identifying the chronic conditions with which older adults present at epilepsy incidence assists with the evaluation of disease burden in this patient population and informs coordinated care development. The aim of this study was to identify preexisting chronic conditions with excess prevalence in older adults with incident epilepsy compared to those without. METHODS: Using a random sample of 4 999 999 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged >65 years, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of epilepsy incidence in 2019. Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic beneficiaries were oversampled. We identified preexisting chronic conditions from the 2016-2018 Medicare Beneficiary Summary Files and compared chronic condition prevalence between Medicare beneficiaries with and without incident epilepsy in 2019. We characterized variations in preexisting excess chronic condition prevalence by age, sex, and race/ethnicity, adjusting for the racial/ethnic oversampling. RESULTS: We observed excess prevalence of most preexisting chronic conditions in beneficiaries with incident epilepsy (n = 20 545, weighted n = 19 631). For stroke, for example, the adjusted prevalence rate ratio (APRR) was 4.82 (99% CI:4.60, 5.04), meaning that, compared to those without epilepsy, beneficiaries with incident epilepsy in 2019 had 4.82 times the stroke prevalence. Similarly, beneficiaries with incident epilepsy had a higher prevalence rate for preexisting neurological conditions (APRR = 3.17, 99% CI = 3.08-3.27), substance use disorders (APRR = 3.00, 99% CI = 2.81-3.19), and psychiatric disorders (APRR = 1.98, 99% CI = 1.94-2.01). For most documented chronic conditions, excess prevalence among beneficiaries with incident epilepsy in 2019 was larger for younger age groups compared to older age groups, and for Hispanic beneficiaries compared to both non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black beneficiaries. SIGNIFICANCE: Compared to epilepsy-free Medicare beneficiaries, those with incident epilepsy in 2019 had a higher prevalence of most preexisting chronic conditions. Our findings highlight the importance of health promotion and prevention, multidisciplinary care, and elucidating shared pathophysiology to identify opportunities for prevention.

Understanding the Utility of Less Than Six-Month Prognosis Using Administrative Data Among U.S. Nursing Home Residents With Cancer.

Background: There is a dearth of studies evaluating the utility of reporting prognostication among nursing home (NH) residents with cancer. Objective: To study factors associated with documented less than six-month prognosis, and its relationship with end-of-life (EOL) care quality measures among residents with cancer. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results linked with Medicare, and the Minimum Data Set databases was used to identify 20,397 NH residents in the United States with breast, colorectal, lung, pancreatic, or prostate cancer who died between July 2016 and December 2018. Of these, 2205 residents (10.8%) were documented with less than six-month prognosis upon NH admission. Main outcomes were more than one hospitalization, more than one emergency department visit, and any intensive care unit admission within the last 30 days of life as aggressive EOL care markers, as well as admission to hospice, receipt of advance care planning and palliative care, and survival. Specificity and sensitivity of prognosis were assessed using six-month mortality as the outcome. Propensity score matching adjusted for selection biases, and logistic regression examined association. Results: Specificity and sensitivity of documented less than six-month prognosis for mortality were 94.2% and 13.7%, respectively. Residents with documented less than six-month prognosis had greater odds of being admitted to hospice than those without (adjusted odds ratio: 3.27, 95% confidence interval: 2.86-3.62), and lower odds to receive aggressive EOL care. Conclusion: In this cohort study, documented less than six-month prognosis was associated with less aggressive EOL care. Despite its high specificity, however, low sensitivity limits its utility to operationalize care on a larger population of residents with terminal illness.

Aggressive end-of-life care across gradients of cognitive impairment in nursing home patients with metastatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Studies examining end-of-life (EOL) care in older cancer patients are scarce, and prior studies have not accounted for gradients of cognitive impairment (COG-I). We examine EOL care patterns across COG-I gradients, hypothesizing that greater COG-I severity is associated with lower odds of receiving aggressive EOL care. METHODS: Using data from the linked Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) -Medicare -Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0, we identified patients with nursing facility stays (NFS) and who died with metastatic cancer from 2013 to 2017. Markers of aggressive EOL care were: cancer-directed treatment, intensive care unit admission, >1 emergency department visit, or >1 hospitalization in the last 30 days of life, hospice enrollment in the last 3 days of life, and in-hospital death. In addition to descriptive analysis, we conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis to evaluate the independent association between COG-I severity and receipt of aggressive EOL care. RESULTS: Of the 40,833 patients in our study population, 49.2% were cognitively intact; 24.4% had mild COG-I; 19.7% had moderate COG-I; and 6.7% had severe COG-I. The percent of patients who received aggressive EOL care was 62.6% and 74.2% among those who were cognitively intact and those with severe COG-I, respectively. Compared with cognitively intact patients, those with severe COG-I had 86% higher odds of receiving any type of aggressive EOL care (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.86 (95% confidence interval: 1.70-2.04)), which were primarily associated with higher odds of in-hospital death. The odds of in-hospital death associated with severe COG-I were higher among those with short- than with long-term stays (aOR:2.58 (2.35-2.84) and aOR:1.40 (1.17-1.67), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to our hypothesis, aggressive EOL care in older metastatic cancer patients with NFS was highest among those suffering severe COG-I. These findings can inform the development of interventions to help reduce aggressive EOL care in this patient population.

Incidence of Aggressive End-of-Life Care Among Older Adults With Metastatic Cancer Living in Nursing Homes and Community Settings.

Importance: Nearly 10% of the 1.5 million persons residing in nursing homes (NHs) have received or will receive a diagnosis of cancer. Although aggressive end-of-life (EOL) care is common among community-dwelling patients with cancer, little is known about such patterns of care among NH residents with cancer. Objective: To compare markers of aggressive EOL care between older adults with metastatic cancer who are NH residents and their community-dwelling counterparts. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database linked with the Medicare database and the Minimum Data Set (including NH clinical assessment data) for deaths occurring from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2017, among 146 329 older patients with metastatic breast, colorectal, lung, pancreas, or prostate cancer, with a lookback period in claims data through July 1, 2012. Statistical analysis was conducted between March 2021 and September 2022. Exposures: Nursing home status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Markers of aggressive EOL care were cancer-directed treatment, intensive care unit admission, more than 1 emergency department visit or more than 1 hospitalization in the last 30 days of life, hospice enrollment in the last 3 days of life, and in-hospital death. Results: The study population included 146 329 patients 66 years of age or older (mean [SD] age, 78.2 [7.3] years; 51.9% men). Aggressive EOL care was more common among NH residents than community-dwelling residents (63.6% vs 58.3%). Nursing home status was associated with 4% higher odds of receiving aggressive EOL care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.04 [95% CI, 1.02-1.07]), 6% higher odds of more than 1 hospital admission in the last 30 days of life (aOR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.10]), and 61% higher odds of dying in the hospital (aOR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.57-1.65]). Conversely, NH status was associated with lower odds of receiving cancer-directed treatment (aOR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.55-0.58]), intensive care unit admission (aOR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.79-0.84]), or enrollment in hospice in the last 3 days of life (aOR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.86-0.92]). Conclusions and Relevance: Despite increased emphasis to reduce aggressive EOL care in the past several decades, such care remains common among older persons with metastatic cancer and is slightly more prevalent among NH residents than their community-dwelling counterparts. Multilevel interventions to decrease aggressive EOL care should target the main factors associated with its prevalence, including hospital admissions in the last 30 days of life and in-hospital death.