A Cross-Sectional Survey Study of Cannabis Use for Fibromyalgia Symptom Management.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of cannabis as a symptom management strategy for patients with fibromyalgia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic, cross-sectional survey was conducted among patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia and treated in Integrative Medicine & Health at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. The survey was constructed with the Symptom Management Theory tool and was sent anonymously via web-based software to patients with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Of 5234 patients with fibromyalgia sent the online survey, 1336 (25.5%) responded and met the inclusion criteria. Survey respondents had a median age of 48 (Q1-Q3: 37.5-58.0) years, and most identified as female. Nearly half of respondents (49.5%, n=661) reported cannabis use since their fibromyalgia diagnosis. The most common symptoms for which respondents reported using cannabis were pain (98.9%, n=654); fatigue (96.2%; n=636); stress, anxiety, or depression (93.9%; n=621); and insomnia (93.6%; n=619). Improvement in pain symptoms with cannabis use was reported by 82.0% (n=536). Most cannabis-using respondents reported that cannabis also improved symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression and of insomnia. CONCLUSION: Considering that cannabis is a popular choice among patients for managing fibromyalgia symptoms, clinicians should have adequate knowledge of cannabis when discussing therapeutic options for fibromyalgia with their patients.

Individual-Level Digital Determinants of Health and Technology Acceptance of Patient Portals: Cross-Sectional Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Digital determinants of health (DDoH), including access to technological tools and digital health literacy, function independently as barriers to health. Assessment for DDoH is not routine within most health care systems, although addressing DDoH could help mitigate differential health outcomes and the digital divide. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the role of individual-level DDoH factors on patient enrollment in and use of the patient portal. METHODS: We developed a multimodal, cross-sectional survey and deployed it to 11,424 individuals based on their preferred mode and language documented within the electronic medical record. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model, enrollment in and intent to use the patient portal were the outcomes of interest. Perceived usefulness and ease of use were assessed to determine construct validity, and exploratory investigations included individual-level DDoH, including internet and device access, availability of technological support, medical complexity, individual relationship with the health care system, and digital health literacy. Counts (n) and proportions (%) were used to describe response categories, and adjusted and unadjusted odds ratios are reported. RESULTS: This study included 1850 respondents (11,424 invited, 16.2% response rate), who were mostly female (1048/1850, 56.6%) and White (1240/1850, 67%), with an average age of 63 years. In the validation of the Technology Acceptance Model, measures of perceived ease of use (ie, using the patient portal will require a lot of mental effort; the patient portal will be very easy to use) and perceived usefulness (ie, the usefulness of the patient portal to send and receive messages with providers, schedule appointments, and refill medications) were positively associated with both enrollment in and intent to use the patient portal. Within adjusted models, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness constructs, in addition to constructs of digital health literacy, knowing what health resources are available on the internet (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.5, 95% CI 1.8-6.6), portal ease of use (aOR 2.8, 95% CI 1.6-5), and portal usefulness (aOR 2.4, 95% CI 1.4-4.2) were significantly associated with patient portal enrollment. Other factors associated with patient portal enrollment and intent to use included being comfortable reading and speaking English, reported use of the internet to surf the web or to send or receive emails, home internet access, and access to technology devices (computer, tablet, smartphone, etc). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing for and addressing individual-level DDoH, including digital health literacy, access to digital tools and technologies, and support of the relational aspects between patients, social support systems, and health care providers, could help mitigate disparities in health. By focusing efforts to assess for and address individual-level DDoH, an opportunity exists to improve digitally driven health care delivery outcomes like access and structural outcomes like bias built within algorithms created with incomplete representation across communities.

Impact of Program Changes Including Telemedicine and Telephonic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Preventing 30-Day Hospital Readmission for Patients in a Care Transitions Program.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: To describe health outcomes of older adults enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Care Transitions (MCCT) program before and during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to unenrolled patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults (age >60 years) in the MCCT program compared to a usual care control group from January 1, 2019, to September 20, 2022. The MCCT program involved a home, telephonic, or telemedicine visit by an advanced care provider. Outcomes were 30- and 180-day hospital readmissions, emergency department (ED) visit, and mortality. We performed a subgroup analysis after March 1, 2020 (during the pandemic). We analyzed data with Cox proportional hazards regression models and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of the 1,012 patients total, 354 were in the MCCT program and 658 were in the usual care group with a mean (SD) age of 81.1 (9.1) years overall. Thirty-day readmission was 16.9% (60 of 354) for MCCT patients and 14.7% (97 of 658) for usual care patients (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88-1.75). During the pandemic, the 30-day readmission rate was 15.1% (28 of 186) for MCCT patients and 14.9% (68 of 455) for usual care patients (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.75-1.91). There was no difference between groups for 180-day hospitalization, 30- or 180-day ED visit, and 30- or 180-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous factors involving patients, providers, and health care delivery systems during the pandemic most likely contributed to these findings.

Outpatient remdesivir treatment program for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019: Patient perceptions, process and economic impact.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is FDA-approved for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Many patients improve clinically to allow for hospital dismissal before completing the 5-day course. In a prior work, patients who continued remdesivir in an outpatient setting experienced better 28-day clinical outcomes. Here, we assessed patients' perspectives and the economic impact of this outpatient practice. METHODS: Hospitalized patients who received remdesivir for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from 11/6/2020 to 11/5/2021 and were dismissed to continue remdesivir in the outpatient setting were surveyed. The cost of care was compared between those who remained hospitalized versus those who were dismissed. RESULTS: 93 (19.8 %) among 470 eligible patients responded to the electronic survey. Responders were older than non-responders. The majority (70.5 %) had symptoms resolved by the time of the survey. Ten (11.4 %) patients had persistent symptoms attributed to long COVID-19. The majority were satisfied with the quality of care (82.3 %) and overall experience (76.0 %) in the infusion clinic. After adjusting for gender, comorbidity score, and WHO severity scale, the predicted costs for the groups were $16,544 (inpatient) and $9,097 (outpatient) per patient (difference of $7,447; p < .01). An estimate of 1,077 hospital bed-days were made available to other patients as a result of this transition to outpatient. CONCLUSION: An outpatient remdesivir program that allowed for early dismissal was perceived favorably by patients. The program resulted in significant cost and resource savings, the latter in terms of the availability of hospital beds for other patients needing critical services.