Patient Engagement by the Tobacco Quitline After Electronic Referrals.

INTRODUCTION: Referrals through the electronic health record (EHR) system provide an efficient evidence-based method to connect patients to the Tobacco Quitline. However, patients frequently do not respond to Quitline phone calls or accept services. The goal of this study was to characterize factors associated with successful engagement with Quitline following e-referrals by physicians in Maryland. AIMS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with hierarchical data modeling. Data for 1790 patients e-referred in 2018-2019 by the University of Maryland Medical System (UMMS) were analyzed. Patients' engagement was assessed using a generalized estimating equation multivariable regression model for ordinal outcomes at two levels: Picking up a phone call from Quitline (1-800-QUIT-NOW) and enrollment in tobacco cessation programs. RESULTS: Older age, female gender, black race, low socioeconomic status, and provider's skills were significantly associated with successful outcomes of Quitline referral. The engagement with Quitline was higher in black non-Hispanic patients compared to other racial/ethnic groups (phone call response odds ratio [OR] = 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35% to 2.93% and service acceptance OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.28% to 2.79%). Patients residing in socioeconomically deprived areas were more likely to respond to Quitline phone calls compared to those from affluent neighborhoods (OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.03% to 2.25%). Patients referred by faculty or attending physicians were more likely to respond compared to those referred by residents (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.04, 1.44, p = .0141). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors impact successful engagement with Quitline. Additional means to improve Quitline engagement success may include focused messaging on tobacco cessation benefits to patients, and skillful counseling by the provider. IMPLICATIONS: Implementation of the clinical decision support (CDS) tool for electronic referrals to the Tobacco Quitline at the UMMS was successful in providing evidence-based free service to elderly patients and socioeconomically disadvantaged racial and ethnic minorities. The CDS also served to engage physicians in conversation about tobacco use and cessation with every tobacco-using patient. Curricular content for physicians in training should be enriched to expand tobacco use and treatment.

Smoking Status, Nicotine Medication, Vaccination, and COVID-19 Hospital Outcomes: Findings from the COVID EHR Cohort at the University of Wisconsin (CEC-UW) Study.

INTRODUCTION: Available evidence is mixed concerning associations between smoking status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Effects of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and vaccination status on COVID-19 outcomes in smokers are unknown. METHODS: Electronic health record data from 104 590 COVID-19 patients hospitalized February 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021 in 21 U.S. health systems were analyzed to assess associations of smoking status, in-hospital NRT prescription, and vaccination status with in-hospital death and ICU admission. RESULTS: Current (n = 7764) and never smokers (n = 57 454) did not differ on outcomes after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, body mass index, and comorbidities. Former (vs never) smokers (n = 33 101) had higher adjusted odds of death (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.17) and ICU admission (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.11). Among current smokers, NRT prescription was associated with reduced mortality (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.82). Vaccination effects were significantly moderated by smoking status; vaccination was more strongly associated with reduced mortality among current (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16-0.66) and former smokers (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39-0.57) than for never smokers (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.79). Vaccination was associated with reduced ICU admission more strongly among former (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66-0.83) than never smokers (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Former but not current smokers hospitalized with COVID-19 are at higher risk for severe outcomes. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with better hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients, especially current and former smokers. NRT during COVID-19 hospitalization may reduce mortality for current smokers. IMPLICATIONS: Prior findings regarding associations between smoking and severe COVID-19 disease outcomes have been inconsistent. This large cohort study suggests potential beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy on COVID-19 outcomes in current smokers and outsized benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in current and former smokers. Such findings may influence clinical practice and prevention efforts and motivate additional research that explores mechanisms for these effects.

Practice Transformation Analytics Dashboard for Clinician Engagement.

PURPOSE: Practice transformation in primary care is a movement toward data-driven redesign of care, patient-centered care delivery, and practitioner activation. A critical requirement for achieving practice transformation is availability of tools to engage practices. METHODS: A total of 48 practices with 109 practice sites participate in the Garden Practice Transformation Network in Maryland (GPTN-Maryland) to work together toward practice transformation and readiness for the Quality Payment Program implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Practice-specific data are collected in GPTN-Maryland by practices themselves and by practice transformation coaches, and are provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. These data are overwhelming to practices when presented piecemeal or together, a barrier to practices taking action to ensure progress on the transformation spectrum. The GPTN-Maryland team therefore created a practice transformation analytics dashboard as a tool to present data that are actionable in care redesign. RESULTS: When practices reviewed their data provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services using the dashboard, they were often seeing, for the first time, cost data on their patients, trends in their key performance indicator data, and their practice transformation phase. Overall, 72% of practices found the dashboard engaging, and 48% found the data as presented to be actionable. CONCLUSIONS: The practice transformation analytics dashboard encourages practices to advance in practice transformation and improvement of patient care delivery. This tool engaged practices in discussions about data, care redesign, and costs of care, and about how to develop sustainable change within their practices. Research is needed to study the impact of the dashboard on costs and quality of care delivery.

Maryland Multipayor Patient-centered Medical Home Program: A 4-Year Quasiexperimental Evaluation of Quality, Utilization, Patient Satisfaction, and Provider Perceptions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate impact of the Maryland Multipayor Patient-centered Medical Home Program (MMPP) on: (1) quality, utilization, and costs of care; (2) beneficiaries' experiences and satisfaction with care; and (3) perceptions of providers. DESIGN: 4-year quasiexperimental design with a difference-in-differences analytic approach to compare changes in outcomes between MMPP practices and propensity score-matched comparisons; pre-post design for patient-reported outcomes among MMPP beneficiaries. SUBJECTS: Beneficiaries (Medicaid-insured and privately insured) and providers in 52 MMPP practices and 104 matched comparisons in Maryland. INTERVENTION: Participating practices received unconditional financial support and coaching to facilitate functioning as medical homes, membership in a learning collaborative to promote education and dissemination of best practices, and performance-based payments. MEASURES: Sixteen quality, 20 utilization, and 13 cost measures from administrative data; patient-reported outcomes on care delivery, trust in provider, access to care, and chronic illness management; and provider perceptions of team operation, team culture, satisfaction with care provided, and patient-centered medical home transformation. RESULTS: The MMPP had mixed impact on site-level quality and utilization measures. Participation was significantly associated with lower inpatient and outpatient payments in the first year among privately insured beneficiaries, and for the entire duration among Medicaid beneficiaries. There was indication that MMPP practices shifted responsibility for certain administrative tasks from clinicians to medical assistants or care managers. The program had limited effect on measures of patient satisfaction (although response rates were low) and on provider perceptions. CONCLUSIONS: The MMPP demonstrated mixed results of its impact and indicated differential program effects for privately insured and Medicaid beneficiaries.

Characterization of the COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Patients With Chronic Diseases in a Large University-based Family Medicine Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: To characterize COVID-19 vaccine uptake in patients with chronic conditions at the large university-based Family Medicine practice serving a population with low COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. METHODS: A rolling panel of patients attributed to the practice was submitted monthly to the Chesapeake Regional Health Information Exchange (CRISP) to monitor patients' vaccination status. Chronic conditions were identified using the CMS Chronic Disease Warehouse. An outreach strategy deploying Care Managers was developed and implemented. Associations between vaccination status and patients' characteristics were examined using a multivariable Cox's proportional hazard regression modeling. RESULTS: Among 8469 empaneled adult (18+) patients, 6404 (75.6%) received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine in December 2020 to March 2022. Patients were relatively young (83.4% <65 years old), predominantly female (72.3%), and non-Hispanic Black (83.0%). Among chronic conditions, hypertension had the highest prevalence (35.7%), followed by diabetes (17.0%). Associations between vaccine status and the presence of chronic conditions varied by age and race. Older patients (45+ years old) with diabetes and/or hypertension showed a statistically significant delay in receiving COVID-19 vaccine, while young Black adults (18-44 years old) with diabetes complicated by hypertension were more likely to be vaccinated compared to patients of the same age and race with no chronic conditions (Hazard ratio 1.45; 95% CI 1.19,1.77; P = .0003). CONCLUSIONS: The practice-specific COVID-19 vaccine CRISP dashboard helped to identify and address delays in receiving COVID-19 vaccine in the most vulnerable, underserved populations. Reasons for age and race-specific delays in patients with diabetes and hypertension should be explored further.

Integrating a Systematic, Comprehensive E-Cigarette and Vaping Assessment Tool into the Electronic Health Record.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the use of electronic cigarettes increased sharply, leading to increased e-cigarette, or Vaping Product Use-Associated Lung Injury (EVALI), and other acute pulmonary conditions. There is an urgent need for clinical information about e-cigarette users to identify factors that contribute to EVALI. We developed an e-cigarette/vaping assessment tool (EVAT) that was integrated into the Electronic Health Record (EHR) of a large state-wide medical system and initiated a system-wide dissemination and education to support its use. METHODS: EVAT documented current vaping status, history, and e-cigarette content (nicotine, cannabinoids, and/or flavoring). Educational materials and presentations were developed via a comprehensive literature review. EVAT utilization in the EHR was assessed quarterly. Patients' demographic data and clinical site name were also collected. RESULTS: The EVAT was built, validated, and integrated with the EHR in July 2020. Live and virtual seminars were conducted for prescribing providers and clinical staff. Asynchronous training was offered using podcasts, e-mails, and Epic tip sheets. Participants were informed about vaping harm and EVALI and instructed on the use of EVAT. As of December 31, 2022, EVAT was used 988,181 times, with 376,559 unique patients evaluated. Overall, 1,063 hospital units and affiliated ambulatory clinics used EVAT, including 64 Primary Care, 95 Pediatrics, and 874 Specialty sites. CONCLUSIONS: EVAT was successfully implemented. Continued outreach efforts are needed to further increase its usage. Education materials should be enhanced to help providers to reach youth and vulnerable populations and connect patients to the tobacco treatment resources.

Relations of Current and Past Cancer with Severe Outcomes among 104,590 Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: The COVID EHR Cohort at the University of Wisconsin.

BACKGROUND: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. METHODS: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. RESULTS: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96-1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. IMPACT: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3.

Impact of a Statewide Multi-Payer Patient-Centered Medical Home Program on Antihypertensive Medication Adherence.

Evidence suggests that the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model of primary care improves management of chronic disease, but there is limited research contrasting this model's effect when financed by a single payer versus multiple payers, and among patients with different types of health insurance. This study evaluates the impact of a statewide medical home demonstration, the Maryland Multi-Payer PCMH Program (MMPP), on adherence to antihypertensive medication therapy relative to non-PCMH primary care and to the PCMH model when financed by a single payer. The authors used a difference-in-differences analytic design to analyze changes in medication possession ratio for antihypertensive medications among Medicaid-insured and privately insured non-elderly adult patients attributed to primary care practices in the MMPP ("multi-payer PCMHs"), medical homes in Maryland that participated in a regional PCMH program funded by a single private payer ("single-payer PCMHs"), and non-PCMH practices in Maryland. Comparison sites were matched to multi-payer PCMHs using propensity scores based on practice characteristics, location, and aggregated provider characteristics. Multi-payer PCMHs performed better on antihypertensive medication adherence for both Medicaid-insured and privately insured patients relative to single-payer PCMHs. Statistically significant effects were not observed consistently until the second year of the demonstration. There were negligible differences in outcome trends between multi-payer medical homes and matched non-PCMH practices. Findings indicate that health care delivery innovations may yield superior population health outcomes under multi-payer financing compared to when such initiatives are financed by a single payer.

The first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Mortality, intubation and ICU rates among 104,590 patients hospitalized at 21 United States health systems.

MAIN OBJECTIVE: There is limited information on how patient outcomes have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study characterizes changes in mortality, intubation, and ICU admission rates during the first 20 months of the pandemic. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: University of Wisconsin researchers collected and harmonized electronic health record data from 1.1 million COVID-19 patients across 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. The analysis comprised data from 104,590 adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Inclusion criteria for the analysis were: (1) age 18 years or older; (2) COVID-19 ICD-10 diagnosis during hospitalization and/or a positive COVID-19 PCR test in a 14-day window (+/- 7 days of hospital admission); and (3) health system contact prior to COVID-19 hospitalization. Outcomes assessed were: (1) mortality (primary), (2) endotracheal intubation, and (3) ICU admission. RESULTS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The 104,590 hospitalized participants had a mean age of 61.7 years and were 50.4% female, 24% Black, and 56.8% White. Overall risk-standardized mortality (adjusted for age, sex, race, ethnicity, body mass index, insurance status and medical comorbidities) declined from 16% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients (95% CI: 16% to 17%) early in the pandemic (February-April 2020) to 9% (CI: 9% to 10%) later (July-September 2021). Among subpopulations, males (vs. females), those on Medicare (vs. those on commercial insurance), the severely obese (vs. normal weight), and those aged 60 and older (vs. younger individuals) had especially high mortality rates both early and late in the pandemic. ICU admission and intubation rates also declined across these 20 months. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality, intubation, and ICU admission rates improved markedly over the first 20 months of the pandemic among adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients although gains varied by subpopulation. These data provide important information on the course of COVID-19 and identify hospitalized patient groups at heightened risk for negative outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04506528 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04506528).

Comparison of patient visits to emergency departments, physician offices, and dental offices for dental problems and injuries.

OBJECTIVES: Our understanding of the use of emergency departments (EDs) and physician offices for the management of dental problems is limited. We undertook this study to examine whether there are differences in their use by low-income White and minority adults as compared with higher-income adults. METHODS: Participantsincluded White, Black, and Hispanic adults who had experi enced a dental problem during the previous 12 months and who visited a physician, ED, or dentist for treatment. We selected a stratified random sample of 27,002 Maryland households with listed telephones to screen for eligibility. We identified 1,387 households with an eligible adult, selected 423 for interviews, and completed interviews with 401 (94.8%). RESULTS: To restore correct proportionality to the sample, and to adjust for nonresponse and the distribution of demographic characteristics, weights were created for use in the analyses. Only 7.1 percent of respondents contacted an ED, while 14.3 percent contacted a physician and 90.2 percent a dentist. The vast majority of respondents who contacted an ED (96.0%) or a physician (92.2%) also contacted a dentist. Lower-income respondents were more likely to seek care from an ED, while higher-income respondents were more likely to seek care from a dentist. Over whelmingly, respondents visiting EDs (89.4%) and physicians (51.7%) were instructed to see a dentist or given prescriptions/samples. Treatment provided by EDs, physicians, and dentists was not associated with the respondent's income or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents visiting EDs and physicians typically did not receive definitive care and subsequently visited a dentist for treatment.

Association of COVID-19 With Race and Socioeconomic Factors in Family Medicine.

INTRODUCTION: Recent data demonstrated that socioeconomic, environmental, demographic, and health factors can contribute to vulnerability for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). The goal of this study was to assess association between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS CoV-2) infection and demographic and socioeconomic factors in patients from a large academic family medicine practice to support practice operations. METHODS: Patients referred for SARS CoV-2 testing by practice providers were identified using shared patient lists in the electronic health records (Epic). The Health Information Exchange (CRISP) was used to identify additional practice-attributed patients receiving testing elsewhere. RESULTS: Compared with white non-Hispanic patients, the odds of COVID-19 detection were higher in black non-Hispanic (odds ratio [OR] = 1.75; 95% CI, 1.18-2.59, P = .0052) and Hispanic patients (OR = 5.40; 95% CI, 3.11-9.38, P < .0001). The latent class analysis revealed additional patterns in health disparities. Patients living in the areas with Area Deprivation Index 8-10 who were predominantly black had higher risk for SARS CoV-2 infection compared with patients living in less socioeconomically deprived areas who were predominantly white (OR = 1.68; 95% CI, 1.25-2.28; P = .0007). CONCLUSION: Our data provide insight into the association of COVID-19 with race/ethnic minority patients residing in highly socioeconomically deprived areas. These data could impact outreach and management of ambulatory COVID-19 in the future.

Electronic referrals to the tobacco Quitline: implementation strategies in a large health system to optimize delivery of tobacco cessation to patients.

Electronic referrals provide an efficient solution for clinicians to connect patients to free tobacco cessation services, such as the tobacco Quitline. However, strategic planning is necessary for the successful adoption of this method across the health care system. The purpose of this study was to develop an implementation strategy for electronic referrals to the tobacco Quitline in a large health system. A clinical decision support tool created a closed-loop e-referral pathway between the electronic health record system and the Quitline. Multilevel strategies were developed to implement the e-referral process across the entire health system, including leadership buy-in, Epic tip sheets, newsletters, training for practice champions and staff, physician educator, patient-focused advertisements, and video clips distribution by the Maryland Department of Health Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control. The implementation of a system-wide e-referral pathway for tobacco cessation involved continuous clinician education and training, systematic quality control, and engaging "champion" clinicians. Postimplementation data analysis revealed that 1,790 e-referrals were received by the Quitline in 2018-2019, of which 18% accepted follow-up services, 18% declined, and 64% were not reached after multiple attempts. Among 322 patients who accepted Quitline services, 55% requested nicotine replacement therapy. Overall, 282 clinicians referred patients, including 107 primary care physicians and 175 specialists; 62 clinicians e-referred 72% patients, thereby emerging as "tobacco champions." The e-referral process is an efficient method for tobacco users to receive a cessation referral from clinicians. Sustainability can be achieved through leadership buy-in, physician ease of use, patient motivation, information technology supports, and reminders.

Comparison of patient centeredness of visits to emergency departments, physicians, and dentists for dental problems and injuries.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered care has a positive impact on patient health status. This report compares patient assessments of patient centeredness during treatment in hospital emergency departments (EDs) and physician and dentist offices for dental problems and injuries. RESEARCH DESIGN: Participants included low-income White, Black, and Hispanic adults who had experienced a dental problem or injury during the previous 12 months and who visited an emergency department, physician, or dentist for treatment. A stratified random sample of Maryland households participated in a cross-sectional telephone survey. Interviews were completed with 94.8% (401/423) of eligible individuals. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The measure of predictive power, the pseudo-R2s, calculated for the logistic regression models ranged from 12% to 18% for the analyses of responses to the measures of patient centeredness (satisfaction with treatment, careful listening, thorough explaining, spending enough time, and treated with courtesy and respect). EDs were less likely than dentists to treat patients with great courtesy and respect. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to identify factors that support patient-centered care.

Hypertension and Diabetes Quality Improvement in a Practice Transformation Network.

The Garden Practice Transformation Network in Maryland brought together primary and specialty practices working toward value-based models and efficient care delivery. Practices were provided with coaching and live and multimedia education regarding practice transformation and quality improvement. Coaches supported practices in multipronged approaches to quality improvement. Practice champions and clinical staff were trained on appropriate documentation of blood pressure (BP) and diabetes measures, and new workflows to optimize care delivery. Quality improvement staff were trained in extracting data from electronic health records, providing feedback to practice clinicians, and reporting to Practice Transformation Network staff. Final measurement of BP control was 66%, and final measurement of blood glucose control was 28%. Quality improvement activities in a practice transformation network led to the delivery of high-quality care and quality improvement.

Joy in Work for Clinicians and Staff: Identifying Remedial Predictors of Burnout from the Mini Z Survey.

PURPOSE: The CMS Transforming Clinical Practice Initiative (TCPI) provided coaching and learning support to practices during transition to new models of value-based care. Maryland ambulatory practices participated in the Garden Practice Transformation Network (GPTN) as a part of the TCPI. During practices assessment, we measured prevalence of burnout and identified its remediable predictors among GPTN-Maryland practices. METHODS: A modified Mini Z tool survey was distributed among clinicians and staff in November 2018 - July 2019. Association between presence of burnout and burnout drivers was assessed using a Generalized Estimating Equation regression model for ordinal outcome. RESULTS: Data from 166 responses were analyzed. Prevalence of burnout symptoms was 22%, with 35% enjoying their work. A 100-point Time Constraints/Teamwork (T/T) score was constructed using factors significantly associated with burnout symptoms. T/T score increase by 1 unit was associated with 10% increase in the odds of moving from the group experiencing burnout or stress to the group who found 'joy in work' (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.07, 1.13, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The Mini Z-derived T/T score could be useful for quick assessment of the degree of burnout and identifying burnout drivers related to effective organizational structure and supportive teamwork in practice personnel.

Utilizing the Learning Health System Adaptation to guide Family Medicine Practice to COVID-19 response.

COVID-19 supportive quarantine care in the community is managed by primary care practices. There is no current guidance on how a primary care practice with high volumes of patients screened for COVID-19 can re-configure itself to become responsive to the pandemic. We examined Learning Health System guidance from the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine and adapted it to our primary care practice to create an efficient, effective, adaptive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We suggest evaluating this response in the future for effectiveness and efficiency.