Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
J Gen Intern Med ; 2024 May 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38769259

ABSTRACT

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.

2.
JAMA ; 329(17): 1495-1509, 2023 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37129650

ABSTRACT

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 = 69 009). 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 = 27 830), 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.


Subject(s)
Latent Tuberculosis , Mass Screening , Adult , Humans , Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury/etiology , Isoniazid/adverse effects , Isoniazid/therapeutic use , Latent Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Latent Tuberculosis/drug therapy , Latent Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Rifampin/adverse effects , Rifampin/therapeutic use , United States/epidemiology , Antitubercular Agents/adverse effects , Antitubercular Agents/therapeutic use , Practice Guidelines as Topic
3.
Fam Pract ; 37(2): 269-275, 2020 03 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31677267

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia/legislation & jurisprudence , Guideline Adherence , Physicians/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Suicide, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Decision Making , Education, Medical , Euthanasia/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Netherlands , Physician-Patient Relations , Physicians/legislation & jurisprudence , Qualitative Research , Suicide, Assisted/statistics & numerical data
4.
Implement Res Pract ; 3: 26334895221094297, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37091109

ABSTRACT

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.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL