Effect of Personalized Messages Sent by a Health System's Patient Portal on Influenza Vaccination Rates: a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Adult influenza vaccination rates are low. Tailored patient reminders might raise rates. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate impact of a health system's patient portal reminders: (1) tailored to patient characteristics and (2) incorporating behavioral science strategies, on influenza vaccination rates among adults. DESIGN: Pragmatic 6-arm randomized trial across a health system during the 2019-2020 influenza vaccination season. The setting was one large health system-53 adult primary care practices. PARTICIPANTS: All adult patients who used the patient portal within 12 months, stratified by the following: young adults (18-64 years, without diabetes), older adults (≥65 years, without diabetes), and those with diabetes (≥18 years). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized within strata to either (1) pre-commitment reminder alone (1 message, mid-October), (2) pre-commitment + loss frame messages, (3) pre-commitment + gain frame messages, (4) loss frame messages alone, (5) gain frame messages alone, or (6) standard of care control. Patients in the pre-commitment group were sent a message in mid-October, asking if they planned on getting an influenza vaccination. Patients in loss or gain frame groups were sent up to 3 portal reminders (late October, November, and December, if no documented influenza vaccination in the EHR) about importance and safety of influenza vaccine. MAIN MEASURES: Receipt of 1 influenza vaccine from 10/01/2019 to 03/31/2020. KEY RESULTS: 196,486 patients (145,166 young adults, 29,795 older adults, 21,525 adults with diabetes) were randomized. Influenza vaccination rates were as follows: for young adults 36.8%, for older adults 55.6%, and for diabetics 60.6%. On unadjusted and adjusted (for age, gender, insurance, race, ethnicity, and prior influenza vaccine history) analyses, influenza vaccination rates were not statistically different for any study group versus control. CONCLUSIONS: Patient reminders sent by a health system's patient portal that were tailored to patient demographics (young adults, older adults, diabetes) and that incorporated two behavioral economic messaging strategies (pre-commitment and loss/gain framing) were not effective in raising influenza vaccination rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04110314).

The Economic Impact of Lower Extremity Periprosthetic Fractures in a Large Hospital System.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) place a burden on hospital systems. They occur in older patients with medical comorbidities, as unplanned events requiring technically complex surgeries with expensive implants. The purpose of this study was to describe this patient population and evaluate the economic impact of PPFs on a hospital system. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of PPFs of the hip and knee between 2018 and 2019. Demographics, length of stay (LOS), and discharge disposition were collected. We performed chart and radiographic reviews to determine the fracture classification and type of treatment performed. An analysis of direct inpatient costs was performed and categorized by a fracture type. RESULTS: We identified 213 periprosthetic hip and 151 periprosthetic knee fractures. The mean age of hip patients was 77 years, and 71% were female. The average surgery time was 194 minutes, LOS was 5.01 days, and 71% were discharged to a skilled nursing facility (SNF). The mean age of knee patients was 76 years, and 79% were female. The average surgery time was 174 minutes, LOS was 5.12 days, and 70% were discharged to a SNF. The median direct cost of hip fractures was $17,108, with Vancouver B2 and B3 costing significantly more at $19,987 and $23,935, respectively (P value <.0001). The median direct cost of knee fractures was $13,713. Type 3 distal femur fractures cost significantly more at $37,445 (P value <.0001). CONCLUSION: PPFs create a significant economic impact on hospital systems. We stratified the costs of treatment based on the fracture type. Significantly higher costs are associated with injuries requiring revision implants.

Effect of State Immunization Information System Based Reminder/Recall for Influenza Vaccinations: A Randomized Trial of Autodialer, Text, and Mailed Messages.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of different modalities of centralized reminder/recall (autodialer, text, mailed reminders) on increasing childhood influenza vaccination. STUDY DESIGN: Two simultaneous randomized clinical trials conducted from October 2017 to April 1, 2018, in New York State and Colorado. There were 61 931 children in New York (136 practices) and 23 845 children in Colorado (42 practices) who were randomized to different centralized reminder/recall modalities-4 arms in New York (autodialer, text, mailed, and no reminder control) and 3 arms in Colorado (autodialer, mailed, and no reminder control). The message content was similar across modalities. Up to 3 reminders were sent for intervention arms. The main outcome measure was receipt of ≥1 influenza vaccine. RESULTS: In New York, compared with the control arm (26.6%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates in the autodialer arm (28.0%) were 1.4 percentage points higher (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10), but the rates for text (27.6%) and mail (26.8%) arms were not different from controls. In Colorado, compared with the control arm (29.9%), postintervention influenza vaccination rates for the autodialer (32.9%) and mail (31.5%) arms were 3.0 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12) and 1.6 percentage points (adjusted risk ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10) higher, respectively. Compared with the control arm, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was $20 (New York) and $16 (Colorado) for autodialer messages. CONCLUSIONS: Centralized reminder/recall for childhood influenza vaccine was most effective via autodialer, less effective via mail, and not effective via text messages. The impact of each modality was modest. Compared with no reminders, the incremental cost per additional vaccine delivered was also modest for autodialer messages. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03294473 and NCT03246100.

Bone Cement Waste in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Preliminary Study of Scope and Cost.

Background: Medical waste is both costly and detrimental to the environment, and operating room waste represents a substantial portion of this. To the authors' knowledge, bone cement waste in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has not previously been studied. The vast majority of TKA are cemented, and the volume of TKA is forecast to increase. Given this, we studied the waste resulting from the routine use of 2 40-gram bags of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) powder during cementing in primary TKA. Methods: We first studied the yield of commercially available plain and gentamicin medium-viscosity bone cement powder and calculated the cost/gram of product. We then collected the PMMA remaining after primary TKA to determine the average amount of waste, its cost, and possible correlations with patient and implant metrics that could improve efficiency and reduce waste of PMMA. Results: Overall, PMMA waste averaged 59% per TKA, at a median cost of $129 per case. Cost of waste was greater when gentamicin cement was used, as its cost was 2.5X that of plain cement. Implant sizes and surface area ranges were identified that could reliably allow the use of a single 40-gram package of powder, potentially reducing PMMA waste. Conclusions: While it is acknowledged that zero-waste cementing is not practical, any reduction in waste that does not compromise either the flow of surgery or the adequacy of fixation would be beneficial. Reevaluation of PMMA techniques could reduce waste, resulting in both cost savings and improved sustainability in arthroplasty.

Centralized Reminder/Recall for Human Papillomavirus Vaccination: Findings From Two States-A Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Centralized reminder/recall (C-R/R) using Immunization Information Systems has been effective in increasing childhood immunization rates. Previously, C-R/R using autodialer for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine did not raise rates. We assessed C-R/R for HPV vaccine using other modalities and focused on younger adolescents. METHODS: We conducted a three-arm pragmatic RCT in randomly sampled primary care practices in Colorado (n = 88) and New York (n = 136), proportionate to where adolescents received care. We randomized, within practices, adolescents aged 11-14 years who had not completed the HPV vaccination series to receive C-R/R using different modalities (Colorado: autodialer, mail, or control; New York: autodialer, text, or control). Up to two reminders were sent in intervention arms for each dose needed between 2/2017 and 12/2018. RESULTS: In Colorado, no significant differences were found for series initiation (31.3% control, 31.1% autodial, 31.8% mail), with slight improvement for series completion in the autodialer arm (29.7% control, 31.1% autodialer, p = .04) but not the mail arm (30.9%, p = .06). No significant differences were found in New York for series initiation (24.1% for all arms) or completion (17.1% control, 16.9% autodial, 17.9% text). Adjusted analyses showed higher completion rates for the autodialer arm in Colorado but not for other arms. In Colorado, C-R/R reduced time to series completion by around 2 months. Cost per adolescent was $1.81 for mail; under $.40 for all other modalities. CONCLUSIONS: C-R/R has less benefit for raising HPV vaccination rates than other studies have noted for childhood immunizations, although it may quicken series completion at little cost.

Reducing Missed Opportunities for Human Papillomavirus Vaccination in School-Based Health Centers: Impact of an Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Human papillomavirus (HPV) immunization rates among US adolescents are low. Missed opportunities (MOs) for HPV vaccination are common. School-based health centers (SBHCs) have potential to boost HPV vaccination, but their role in addressing MOs has not been examined. METHODS: We implemented a multicomponent intervention, consisting of 3 immunization process workflow modifications combined with provider performance feedback, in 2 Los Angeles area SBHCs and conducted a pre/post evaluation of MOs. Our primary outcome was SBHC-based MOs for HPV vaccination during all visits, including visits for confidential reproductive health care (ie, confidential visits). Secondary outcomes were MOs for meningococcal (MenACWY) and influenza vaccination during visits for nonconfidential care. RESULTS: MOs for HPV vaccination decreased during all visit types from the baseline to the intervention period (82.3% to 46.1%; adjusted risk ratio [RR] = 0.558, P < .0001). The rate decrease appeared to be greater during physical examination visits than confidential visits (83.4% to 31.6% vs 98.7% to 70.4%, respectively). MOs for MenACWY (74.5% to 35.0%; adjusted RR = 0.47, P < .0001) and influenza (86.7% to 69.3%; adjusted RR = 0.792, P < .0001) vaccination also decreased during nonconfidential visits. Vaccine refusal was the most frequently documented reason for HPV vaccine MOs during both physical examination and confidential visits. CONCLUSIONS: A pragmatic, multicomponent SBHC intervention reduced MOs for HPV vaccination during all visit types. MOs for MenACWY and influenza vaccination also decreased during nonconfidential visits. Findings suggest that practice-level improvements in SBHCs can improve delivery of HPV and other adolescent vaccines.

Pediatric patient portal use in one health system.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to assess, for children in one large health system, (1) characteristics of active users of the patient portal (≥1 use in prior 12 months), (2) portal use by adolescents, and (3) variations in pediatric patient portal use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from the electronic health record regarding pediatric portal use during 2017-2018 across a health system (39 871 pediatric patients). RESULTS: Altogether, 63.5% of pediatric patients were active portal users. Children (proxies) who were boys, privately insured, white, and spoke English were more likely to be active users. Common uses involved messaging with physicians, medications, allergies, letters, and laboratory results. By 15 years of age, >50% of adolescents used the portal by themselves (without a proxy). Pediatric portal use varied widely across practices. DISCUSSION: Pediatric or adolescent portal use is quite high, but large variations exist. CONCLUSION: Use of the portal for pediatric care may reflect varying pediatric patient engagement.

Prevalence and characteristics of HPV vaccine hesitancy among parents of adolescents across the US.

BACKGROUND: While many clinicians encounter parents or adolescents who refuse HPV vaccine, little is known about the prevalence of hesitancy for HPV vaccine nationally or its association with vaccination. METHODS: In April 2019, we surveyed families with adolescents 11-17 years using a national online panel (Knowledge Panel®) as the sampling frame. We assessed the prevalence of HPV vaccine hesitancy with the validated 9-item Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS). We used multivariate analyses to assess demographic factors associated with HPV vaccine hesitancy. We also assessed practical barriers to receipt of HPV vaccine and the relationship between barriers and hesitancy. Finally, we evaluated the association between both HPV vaccine hesitancy and practical barriers on HPV vaccine receipt or refusal. RESULTS: 2,177 parents out of 4,185 sampled (52%) completed the survey, 2,020 qualified (lived with adolescent). Using a VHS cut-off score > 3 out of 5 points, 23% of US parents were hesitant about HPV vaccine. Hesitancy was lower among those with Hispanic ethnicity. At least one out of five parents disagreed that the HPV vaccine is beneficial for their adolescent, that the vaccine is effective, protects against HPV-related cancers, or that they followed their adolescent's health-care provider's recommendation about the vaccine. Many were concerned about vaccine side effects and the novelty of the vaccine. Adolescents living with vaccine-hesitant parents were less than one-third as likely to have received the vaccine (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.24, 0.35) or completed the vaccine series (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.23, 0.36), and were 6-fold more likely to have refused the vaccine because of parental vaccine-related concerns (RR = 6.09, 95% CI = 5.26, 7.04). Most practical barriers were independently associated with vaccine receipt but not with vaccine refusal. CONCLUSIONS: HPV vaccine hesitancy is common nationally and strongly related to both under-vaccination and vaccine refusal.

Effect of Patient Portal Reminders Sent by a Health Care System on Influenza Vaccination Rates: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Influenza vaccination rates across the US are low. Because few practices send patient reminders for influenza vaccination, a scalable patient reminder system is needed. Objective: To evaluate the effect of patient reminders sent via a health care system's electronic health record patient portal on influenza vaccination rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic, 4-arm randomized clinical trial was performed from October 1, 2018, to March 31, 2019, across the UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) health care system. A total of 164 205 patients in 52 primary care practices who had used the patient portal within 12 months were included. Interventions: Patients due for an influenza vaccine were sent a letter via the patient portal of the health care system reminding them about the importance of influenza vaccination, safety of the vaccine, and morbidity associated with influenza. Patients were randomized within primary care practices to 1 of 4 study groups (no reminder [n = 41 070] vs 1 reminder [n = 41 055], 2 reminders [n = 41 046], or 3 reminders [n = 41 034]). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was receipt of 1 or more influenza vaccines as documented in the electronic health record, which was supplemented with influenza vaccination data from external sources (eg, pharmacies). Secondary outcomes were influenza vaccination rates among subgroups and influenza vaccinations self-reported by patients in reply to the portal-based query as having been received elsewhere. Results: A total of 164 205 patients (mean [SD] age, 46.2 [19.6] years; 95 779 [58.3%] female) were randomly allocated to 1 of the 4 study arms. In the primary analysis across all ages and not including patient self-reported vaccinations in reply to portal reminders, influenza vaccination rates were 37.5% for those receiving no reminders, 38.0% for those receiving 1 reminder (P = .008 vs no reminder), 38.2% for those receiving 2 reminders (P = .03 vs no reminder), and 38.2% for those receiving 3 reminders (P = .02 vs no reminder). In the secondary analysis not including patient self-reported vaccinations, among adults aged 18 to 64 years (vaccination rates: 32.0% in the control group, 32.8% in the 1-reminder group, 32.8% in the 2-reminder group, and 32.8% in the 3-reminder group; P = .001), male patients (vaccination rates: 37.3% vs 38.3%, 38.6%, and 38.8%; P = .001), non-Hispanic patients (vaccination rates: 37.6% vs 38.2%, 38.3%, and 38.2%; P = .004), and those who were not vaccinated in the prior 2 years (vaccination rates: 15.3% vs 15.9%, 16.3%, and 16.1%; P < .001), vaccination rates were higher in the portal reminder groups than in the control group; the findings in these 3 subgroups mirrored the findings in the entire population. When self-reported vaccinations received elsewhere were included, influenza vaccination rates were 1.4 to 2.9 percentage points higher in the portal reminder groups, with a dose-response effect (0 reminders: 15 537 [37.8%]; 1 reminder: 16 097 [39.2%]; 2 reminders: 16 426 [40.0%]; and 3 reminders: 16 714 [40.7%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Generic patient portal reminders were effective in minimally increasing influenza vaccination rates, but more intensive or more targeted patient motivational strategies appear to be needed. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03666026.

Effect of State Immunization Information System Centralized Reminder and Recall on HPV Vaccination Rates.

BACKGROUND: Although autodialer centralized reminder and recall (C-R/R) from state immunization information systems (IISs) has been shown to raise childhood vaccination rates, its impact on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates is unclear. METHODS: In a 4-arm pragmatic randomized controlled trial across 2 states, we randomly selected practices representative of the specialty (pediatrics, family medicine, and health center) where children received care. Within each practice, patients 11 to 17.9 years old who had not completed their HPV vaccine series (NY: N = 30 616 in 123 practices; CO: N = 31 502 in 80 practices) were randomly assigned to receive 0, 1, 2, or 3 IIS C-R/R autodialer messages per vaccine dose. We assessed HPV vaccine receipt via the IIS, calculated intervention costs, and compared HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates across study arms. RESULTS: In New York, HPV vaccine initiation rates ranged from 37.0% to 37.4%, and completion rates were between 29.1% and 30.1%, with no significant differences across study arms. In Colorado, HPV vaccine initiation rates ranged from 31.2% to 33.5% and were slightly higher for 1 reminder compared with none, but vaccine completion rates, ranging from 27.0% to 27.8%, were similar. On adjusted analyses in Colorado, vaccine initiation rates were slightly higher for 1 and 3 C-R/R messages (adjusted risk ratios 1.07 and 1.04, respectively); completion rates were slightly higher for 1 and 3 C-R/R messages (adjusted risk ratios 1.02 and 1.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: IIS-based C-R/R for HPV vaccination did not improve HPV vaccination rates in New York and increased vaccination rates slightly in Colorado.

Supporting and sustaining centralized reminder/recall for immunizations: Qualitative insights from stakeholders.

Centralized reminder/recall (C-R/R) is an evidence-based strategy for increasing vaccination rates that uses a population-level database such as a state immunization information system (IIS) to send notifications across large geographic areas. IISs are usually based in state public health departments, which could initiate C-R/R. While C-R/R is a promising strategy, the factors influencing its initiation and sustainment are not clear. Utilizing qualitative content analysis methodology and interviews with key stakeholders involved in or knowledgeable about C-R/R, we examined the characteristics of these initiatives and factors influencing their success. We identified and spoke with managers and senior leaders across IISs, health plans, health systems, pharmaceutical companies, and advocacy organizations and focused especially on C-R/R activities within IISs. Several considerations were determined important to C-R/R success: decision-making, stakeholder buy-in, partnerships, funding, data and technology, evaluation, and message content. Salient barriers were costs and lack of funding, poor contact data quality (i.e. telephone number, home address), and messaging that is either overly broad or too specific. Pertinent facilitators of C-R/R included notifying health providers in advance of an initiative, conducting a rigorous post-reminder/recall evaluation, and engaging a range of partners. Partnerships were important to stakeholders for multiple reasons including technical assistance, resource sharing, and sharing of best practices. Overall, our results illustrate the many opportunities to advance C-R/R through further collaboration within and across public health departments and potentially via public-private partnerships.