Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 50
Filtrar
2.
JAMA Intern Med ; 184(5): 519-527, 2024 May 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38497955

RESUMEN

Importance: Increasing influenza vaccination rates is a public health priority. One method recommended by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others is for health systems to send reminders nudging patients to be vaccinated. Objective: To evaluate and compare the effect of electronic health record (EHR)-based patient portal reminders vs text message reminders on influenza vaccination rates across a health system. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 3-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 7, 2022, to April 30, 2023, among primary care patients within the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) health system. Interventions: Arm 1 received standard of care. The health system sent monthly reminder messages to patients due for an influenza vaccine by portal (arm 2) or text (arm 3). Arm 2 had a 2 × 2 nested design, with fixed vs responsive monthly reminders and preappointment vs no preappointment reminders. Arm 3 had 1 × 2 design, with preappointment vs no preappointment reminders. Preappointment reminders for eligible patients were sent 24 and 48 hours before scheduled primary care visits. Fixed reminders (in October, November, and December) involved identical messages via portal or text. Responsive portal reminders involved a September message asking patients about their plans for vaccination, with a follow-up reminder if the response was affirmative but the patient was not yet vaccinated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was influenza vaccination by April 30, 2023, obtained from the UCLA EHR, including vaccination from pharmacies and other sources. Results: A total of 262 085 patients (mean [SD] age, 45.1 [20.7] years; 237 404 [90.6%] adults; 24 681 [9.4%] children; 149 349 [57.0%] women) in 79 primary care practices were included (87 257 in arm 1, 87 478 in arm 2, and 87 350 in arm 3). At the entire primary care population level, none of the interventions improved influenza vaccination rates. All groups had rates of approximately 47%. There was no statistical or clinically significant improvement following portal vs text, preappointment reminders vs no preappointment reminders (portal and text reminders combined), or responsive vs fixed monthly portal reminders. Conclusions and Relevance: At the population level, neither portal nor text reminders for influenza vaccination were effective. Given that vaccine hesitancy may be a major reason for the lack of impact of portal or text reminders, more intensive interventions by health systems are needed to raise influenza vaccination coverage levels. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05525494.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Portales del Paciente , Sistemas Recordatorios , Envío de Mensajes de Texto , Cobertura de Vacunación , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cobertura de Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Vacunación/métodos , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos
3.
JAMA Health Forum ; 5(3): e240077, 2024 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38488780

RESUMEN

Importance: Excess opioid prescribing after surgery can result in prolonged use and diversion. Email feedback based on social norms may reduce the number of pills prescribed. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of 2 social norm-based interventions on reducing guideline-discordant opioid prescribing after surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at a large health care delivery system in northern California between October 2021 and October 2022 included general, obstetric/gynecologic, and orthopedic surgeons with patients aged 18 years or older discharged to home with an oral opioid prescription. Interventions: In 19 hospitals, 3 surgical specialties (general, orthopedic, and obstetric/gynecologic) were randomly assigned to a control group or 1 of 2 interventions. The guidelines intervention provided email feedback to surgeons on opioid prescribing relative to institutionally endorsed guidelines; the peer comparison intervention provided email feedback on opioid prescribing relative to that of peer surgeons. Emails were sent to surgeons with at least 2 guideline-discordant prescriptions in the previous month. The control group had no intervention. Main Outcome and Measures: The probability that a discharged patient was prescribed a quantity of opioids above the guideline for the respective procedure during the 12 intervention months. Results: There were 38 235 patients discharged from 640 surgeons during the 12-month intervention period. Control-group surgeons prescribed above guidelines 36.8% of the time during the intervention period compared with 27.5% and 25.4% among surgeons in the peer comparison and guidelines arms, respectively. In adjusted models, the peer comparison intervention reduced guideline-discordant prescribing by 5.8 percentage points (95% CI, -10.5 to -1.1; P = .03) and the guidelines intervention reduced it by 4.7 percentage points (95% CI, -9.4 to -0.1; P = .05). Effects were driven by surgeons who performed more surgeries and had more guideline-discordant prescribing at baseline. There was no significant difference between interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial, email feedback based on either guidelines or peer comparison reduced opioid prescribing after surgery. Guideline-based feedback was as effective as peer comparison-based feedback. These interventions are simple, low-cost, and scalable, and may reduce downstream opioid misuse. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05070338.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Humanos , Femenino , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Retroalimentación , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Prescripciones
4.
Psychol Rev ; 2024 Mar 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38512175

RESUMEN

Evidence is steadily mounting that attribute-based models offer a more accurate description of intertemporal choices than traditional alternative-based models. Among the attribute-based models, the tradeoff model offers the broadest coverage of research findings, but at the cost of considerable complexity: There now are various instantiations of the model dealing with partially overlapping universes of choice options and preference patterns. Moreover, there are reports of preference patterns in intertemporal decisions about monetary losses that contradict all attribute-based models proposed so far. Taking stock of these core challenges, and all other evidence, we develop an account of intertemporal choice, the unified tradeoff model, that is simpler, yet more comprehensive, than all currently available versions of the tradeoff model taken together. It borrows extensively from its predecessors, but it introduces a new element, time bias, that enables it to accommodate an extraordinarily broad range of preference patterns, and also generate new predictions that contradict all existing models of intertemporal choice. We report four studies that test and confirm its predictions regarding delay, interval, sign, and magnitude dependence in choices between single-dated outcomes, and a fifth study that tests and confirms its predictions regarding the relation between delay preference in choices that only involve single-dated payments and duration preference in choices that also involve sequences of payments. Having subjected the unified tradeoff model to an elevated risk of disconfirmation, we discuss its parsimony and scope in relation to yet other phenomena, most notably, preference patterns in consumption decisions, the final frontier for attribute-based models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

5.
Ann Intern Med ; 177(3): 324-334, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38315997

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Effective strategies are needed to curtail overuse that may lead to harm. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of clinician decision support redirecting attention to harms and engaging social and reputational concerns on overuse in older primary care patients. DESIGN: 18-month, single-blind, pragmatic, cluster randomized trial, constrained randomization. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04289753). SETTING: 60 primary care internal medicine, family medicine and geriatrics practices within a health system from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 371 primary care clinicians and their older adult patients from participating practices. INTERVENTION: Behavioral science-informed, point-of-care, clinical decision support tools plus brief case-based education addressing the 3 primary clinical outcomes (187 clinicians from 30 clinics) were compared with brief case-based education alone (187 clinicians from 30 clinics). Decision support was designed to increase salience of potential harms, convey social norms, and promote accountability. MEASUREMENTS: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in men aged 76 years and older without previous prostate cancer, urine testing for nonspecific reasons in women aged 65 years and older, and overtreatment of diabetes with hypoglycemic agents in patients aged 75 years and older and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) less than 7%. RESULTS: At randomization, mean clinic annual PSA testing, unspecified urine testing, and diabetes overtreatment rates were 24.9, 23.9, and 16.8 per 100 patients, respectively. After 18 months of intervention, the intervention group had lower adjusted difference-in-differences in annual rates of PSA testing (-8.7 [95% CI, -10.2 to -7.1]), unspecified urine testing (-5.5 [CI, -7.0 to -3.6]), and diabetes overtreatment (-1.4 [CI, -2.9 to -0.03]) compared with education only. Safety measures did not show increased emergency care related to urinary tract infections or hyperglycemia. An HbA1c greater than 9.0% was more common with the intervention among previously overtreated diabetes patients (adjusted difference-in-differences, 0.47 per 100 patients [95% CI, 0.04 to 1.20]). LIMITATION: A single health system limits generalizability; electronic health data limit ability to differentiate between overtesting and underdocumentation. CONCLUSION: Decision support designed to increase clinicians' attention to possible harms, social norms, and reputational concerns reduced unspecified testing compared with offering traditional case-based education alone. Small decreases in diabetes overtreatment may also result in higher rates of uncontrolled diabetes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Método Simple Ciego , Hipoglucemiantes
6.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(6): e2317379, 2023 06 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37289454

RESUMEN

Importance: Interventions that improve clinician performance through feedback should not contribute to job dissatisfaction or staff turnover. Measurement of job satisfaction may help identify interventions that lead to this undesirable consequence. Objective: To evaluate whether mean job satisfaction was less than the margin of clinical significance among clinicians who received social norm feedback (peer comparison) compared with clinicians who did not. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary, preregistered, noninferiority analysis of a cluster randomized trial compared 3 interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design from November 1, 2011, to April 1, 2014. A total of 248 clinicians were enrolled from 47 clinics. The sample size for this analysis was determined by the number of nonmissing job satisfaction scores from the original enrolled sample, which was 201 clinicians from 43 clinics. Data analysis was performed from October 12 to April 13, 2022. Interventions: Feedback comparing individual clinician performance to top-performing peers, delivered in monthly emails (peer comparison). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a response to the following statement: "Overall, I am satisfied with my current job." Responses ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Results: A total of 201 clinicians (response rate, 81%) from 43 of the 47 clinics (91%) provided a survey response about job satisfaction. Clinicians were primarily female (n = 129 [64%]) and board certified in internal medicine (n = 126 [63%]), with a mean (SD) age of 48 (10) years. The clinic-clustered difference in mean job satisfaction was greater than -0.32 (ß = 0.11; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.42; P = .46). Therefore, the preregistered null hypothesis that peer comparison is inferior by resulting in at least a 1-point decrease in job satisfaction by 1 in 3 clinicians was rejected. The secondary null hypothesis that job satisfaction was similar among clinicians randomized to social norm feedback was not able to be rejected. The effect size did not change when controlling for other trial interventions (t = 0.08; P = .94), and no interaction effects were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, peer comparison did not lead to lower job satisfaction. Features that may have protected against dissatisfaction include clinicians' agency over the performance measure, privacy of individual performance, and allowing all clinicians to achieve top performance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT05575115 and NCT01454947.


Asunto(s)
Emociones , Satisfacción en el Trabajo , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Retroalimentación , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico
7.
JAMA Intern Med ; 183(3): 220-222, 2023 03 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36877210
8.
Prev Med ; 170: 107474, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36870572

RESUMEN

Influenza vaccination rates are low. Working with a large US health system, we evaluated three health system-wide interventions using the electronic health record's patient portal to improve influenza vaccination rates. We performed a two-arm RCT with a nested factorial design within the treatment arm, randomizing patients to usual-care control (no portal interventions) or to one or more portal interventions. We included all patients within this health system during the 2020-2021 influenza vaccination season, which overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic. Through the patient portal, we simultaneously tested: pre-commitment messages (sent September 2020, asking patients to commit to a vaccination); monthly portal reminders (October - December 2020), direct appointment scheduling (patients could self-schedule influenza vaccination at multiple sites); and pre-appointment reminder messages (sent before scheduled primary care appointments, reminding patients about influenza vaccination). The main outcome measure was receipt of influenza vaccine (10/01/2020-03/31/2021). We randomized 213,773 patients (196,070 adults ≥18 years, 17,703 children). Influenza vaccination rates overall were low (39.0%). Vaccination rates for study arms did not differ: Control (38.9%), pre-commitment vs no pre-commitment (39.2%/38.9%), direct appointment scheduling yes/no (39.1%/39.1%), pre-appointment reminders yes/no (39.1%/39.1%); p > 0.017 for all comparisons (p value cut-off adjusted for multiple comparisons). After adjusting for age, gender, insurance, race, ethnicity, and prior influenza vaccination, none of the interventions increased vaccination rates. We conclude that patient portal interventions to remind patients to receive influenza vaccine during the COVID-19 pandemic did not raise influenza immunization rates. More intensive or tailored interventions are needed beyond portal innovations to increase influenza vaccination.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Adulto , Niño , Humanos , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Economía del Comportamiento , Pandemias , Sistemas Recordatorios , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunación
9.
Am J Health Promot ; 37(3): 324-332, 2023 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36195982

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To evaluate if nudges delivered by text message prior to an upcoming primary care visit can increase influenza vaccination rates. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Two health systems in the Northeastern US between September 2020 and March 2021. SUBJECTS: 74,811 adults. INTERVENTIONS: Patients in the 19 intervention arms received 1-2 text messages in the 3 days preceding their appointment that varied in their format, interactivity, and content. MEASURES: Influenza vaccination. ANALYSIS: Intention-to-treat. RESULTS: Participants had a mean (SD) age of 50.7 (16.2) years; 55.8% (41,771) were female, 70.6% (52,826) were White, and 19.0% (14,222) were Black. Among the interventions, 5 of 19 (26.3%) had a significantly greater vaccination rate than control. On average, the 19 interventions increased vaccination relative to control by 1.8 percentage points or 6.1% (P = .005). The top performing text message described the vaccine to the patient as "reserved for you" and led to a 3.1 percentage point increase (95% CI, 1.3 to 4.9; P < .001) in vaccination relative to control. Three of the top five performing messages described the vaccine as "reserved for you." None of the interventions performed worse than control. CONCLUSIONS: Text messages encouraging vaccination and delivered prior to an upcoming appointment significantly increased influenza vaccination rates and could be a scalable approach to increase vaccination more broadly.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Envío de Mensajes de Texto , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Sistemas Recordatorios , Vacunación , Atención Primaria de Salud
10.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr ; 104: 104794, 2023 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36115068

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Unnecessary testing and treatment of common conditions in older adults can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The primary objective of this study was to develop and pilot test a set of clinical decision support (CDS) alerts informed by social psychology to address overuse in three areas related to ambulatory care of older adults. METHODS: We developed three electronic health record (EHR) CDS alerts to address overuse and pilot tested them from January 17, 2019 to July 17, 2019. We enrolled 14 primary care physicians from three practices within a large health system who cared for adults aged 65 years and older. Three measures of overuse applied to patients meeting the following criteria: ordering of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer screening in adult men aged 76 years and older, ordering of urinalysis or urine cultures (UA or UC) for non-specific reasons to identify bacteriuria in women aged 65 years and older, and overtreatment of diabetes with insulin or oral hypoglycemic medications in adults aged at 75 years and older (DM). Clinicians received CDS alerts when criteria for any of the three overuse measures were met. We then surveyed clinicians to evaluate their experience with the CDS alerts. RESULTS: The number of clinical encounters that triggered CDS alerts was 19 for PSA, 48 for UA/UC and 128 for DM. For PSA encounters, 4 (21%) orders were not performed after the alert. In the UA/UC encounters 29 (60%) orders were not performed after the alert. For the DM encounters, 21 (34%) had diabetes therapy reduced following the alert. Survey respondents indicated that the alerts were clinically accurate and sometimes led them to change their clinical action. CONCLUSIONS: These CDS alerts were feasible to implement and may minimize unnecessary testing and treatment of common conditions in older adults.


Asunto(s)
Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Masculino , Humanos , Anciano , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Atención Primaria de Salud
12.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 119(29): e2121730119, 2022 07 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35858307

RESUMEN

Policymakers and business leaders often use peer comparison information-showing people how their behavior compares to that of their peers-to motivate a range of behaviors. Despite their widespread use, the potential impact of peer comparison interventions on recipients' well-being is largely unknown. We conducted a 5-mo field experiment involving 199 primary care physicians and 46,631 patients to examine the impact of a peer comparison intervention on physicians' job performance, job satisfaction, and burnout. We varied whether physicians received information about their preventive care performance compared to that of other physicians in the same health system. Our analyses reveal that our implementation of peer comparison did not significantly improve physicians' preventive care performance, but it did significantly decrease job satisfaction and increase burnout, with the effect on job satisfaction persisting for at least 4 mo after the intervention had been discontinued. Quantitative and qualitative evidence on the mechanisms underlying these unanticipated negative effects suggest that the intervention inadvertently signaled a lack of support from leadership. Consistent with this account, providing leaders with training on how to support physicians mitigated the negative effects on well-being. Our research uncovers a critical potential downside of peer comparison interventions, highlights the importance of evaluating the psychological costs of behavioral interventions, and points to how a complementary intervention-leadership support training-can mitigate these costs.


Asunto(s)
Influencia de los Compañeros , Médicos , Agotamiento Profesional/prevención & control , Agotamiento Profesional/psicología , Humanos , Satisfacción en el Trabajo , Liderazgo , Médicos/psicología
13.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 119: 106834, 2022 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35724841

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The CDC estimates that over 40% of Urgent Care visits are for acute respiratory infections (ARI), more than half involving inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions. Previous randomized trials in primary care clinics resulted in reductions in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, but antibiotic stewardship interventions in telehealth have not been systematically assessed. To better understand how best to decrease inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in telehealth, we are conducting a large randomized quality improvement trial testing both patient- and physician-facing feedback and behavioral nudges embedded in the electronic health record. METHODS: Teladoc® clinicians are assigned to one of 9 arms in a 3 × 3 randomized trial. Each clinician is assigned to one of 3 Commitment groups (Public, Private, Control) and one of 3 Performance Feedback groups (Benchmark Peer Comparison, Trending, Control). After randomly selecting ⅓ of states and associated clinicians required for patient-facing components of the Public Commitment intervention, remaining clinicians are randomized to the Control and Private Commitment arms. Clinicians are randomized to the Performance Feedback conditions. The primary outcome is change from baseline in antibiotic prescribing rate for qualifying ARI visits. Secondary outcomes include changes in inappropriate prescribing and revisit rates. Secondary analyses include investigation of heterogeneity of treatment effects. With 1530 clinicians and an intra-clinician correlation in antibiotic prescribing rate of 0.5, we have >80% power to detect 1-7% absolute differences in antibiotic prescribing among groups. DISCUSSION: Findings from this trial may help inform telehealth stewardship strategies, determine whether significant differences exist between Commitment and Feedback interventions, and provide guidance for clinicians and patients to encourage safe and effective antibiotic use. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT05138874.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio , Telemedicina , Antibacterianos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Humanos , Prescripción Inadecuada , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
14.
J Pers Soc Psychol ; 122(2): 310-336, 2022 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35130024

RESUMEN

People differ in their lay theories about how and why the financial well-being of individuals changes over time or varies between individuals. We introduce a measure of Causal Attributions of Financial Uncertainty-the CAFU scale-and find that such attributions can be described reliably along three distinct dimensions, respectively capturing the extent to which changes in financial well-being are perceived to be: (a) knowable and within individuals' control due to individual factors such as effort ("Rewarding"); (b) knowable and outside of individuals' control due to factors such as favoritism and discrimination ("Rigged"); and (c) inherently unpredictable and determined by chance events ("Random"). In a sample representative of the U.S. population on various demographic characteristics (N = 1,102), we find that differences in these beliefs are associated with political ideology, revealing a predicted pattern: conservatives scored higher on the Rewarding subscale and liberals scored higher on the Rigged and Random subscales, even when controlling for key demographics. Moreover, we find that these three dimensions predict responses to different policy messages, even when controlling for political ideology. In three preregistered experiments (combined N = 2,560), we observe increased support for various social welfare policies when we highlighted aspects of these policies that are compatible with people's beliefs about financial well-being. Likewise, we observe increased support for political candidates when they expressed their positions in a way that is compatible with people's beliefs. Thus, this work can help better understand drivers of political attitudes and guide in crafting more persuasive policy messages. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).


Asunto(s)
Actitud , Políticas , Humanos , Comunicación Persuasiva , Política , Percepción Social
15.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(11): 2777-2785, 2022 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34993860

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate polypharmacy, prevalent among older patients, is associated with substantial harms. OBJECTIVE: To develop measures of high-risk polypharmacy and pilot test novel electronic health record (EHR)-based nudges grounded in behavioral science to promote deprescribing. DESIGN: We developed and validated seven measures, then conducted a three-arm pilot from February to May 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Validation used data from 78,880 patients from a single large health system. Six physicians were pre-pilot test environment users. Sixty-nine physicians participated in the pilot. MAIN MEASURES: Rate of high-risk polypharmacy among patients aged 65 years or older. High-risk polypharmacy was defined as being prescribed ≥5 medications and satisfying ≥1 of the following high-risk criteria: drugs that increase fall risk among patients with fall history; drug-drug interactions that increase fall risk; thiazolidinedione, NSAID, or non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker in heart failure; and glyburide, glimepiride, or NSAID in chronic kidney disease. INTERVENTIONS: Physicians received EHR alerts when renewing or prescribing certain high-risk medications when criteria were met. One practice received a "commitment nudge" that offered a chance to commit to addressing high-risk polypharmacy at the next visit. One practice received a "justification nudge" that asked for a reason when high-risk polypharmacy was present. One practice received both. KEY RESULTS: Among 55,107 patients 65 and older prescribed 5 or more medications, 6256 (7.9%) had one or more high-risk criteria. During the pilot, the mean (SD) number of nudges per physician per week was 1.7 (0.4) for commitment, 0.8 (0.5) for justification, and 1.9 (0.5) for both interventions. Physicians requested to be reminded to address high-risk polypharmacy for 236/833 (28.3%) of the commitment nudges and acknowledged 441 of 460 (95.9%) of justification nudges, providing a text response for 187 (40.7%). CONCLUSIONS: EHR-based measures and nudges addressing high-risk polypharmacy were feasible to develop and implement, and warrant further testing.


Asunto(s)
Prescripción Inadecuada , Polifarmacia , Anciano , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Electrónica , Humanos , Prescripción Inadecuada/prevención & control , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud
16.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(6): 1400-1407, 2022 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34505234

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Since the advent of COVID-19, accelerated adoption of systems that reduce face-to-face encounters has outpaced training and best practices. Electronic consultations (eConsults), structured communications between PCPs and specialists regarding a case, have been effective in reducing face-to-face specialist encounters. As the health system rapidly adapts to multiple new practices and communication tools, new mechanisms to measure and improve performance in this context are needed. OBJECTIVE: To test whether feedback comparing physicians to top performing peers using co-specialists' ratings improves performance. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Eighty facility-specialty clusters and 214 clinicians INTERVENTION: Providers in the feedback arms were sent messages that announced their membership in an elite group of "Top Performers" or provided actionable recommendations with feedback for providers that were "Not Top Performers." MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes were changes in peer ratings in the following performance dimensions after feedback was received: (1) elicitation of information from primary care practitioners; (2) adherence to institutional clinical guidelines; (3) agreement with peer's medical decision-making; (4) educational value; (5) relationship building. KEY RESULTS: Specialists showed significant improvements on 3 of the 5 consultation performance dimensions: medical decision-making (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.14, p<.05), educational value (1.86, 1.17-2.96) and relationship building (1.63, 1.13-2.35) (both p<.01). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has shed light on clinicians' commitment to professionalism and service as we rapidly adapt to changing paradigms. Interventions that appeal to professional norms can help improve the efficacy of new systems of practice. We show that specialists' performance can be measured and improved with feedback using aspirational norms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03784950.


Asunto(s)
Benchmarking , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Electrónica , Humanos , Los Angeles , Derivación y Consulta
17.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(3): 615-623, 2022 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34472020

RESUMEN

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).


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Portales del Paciente , Envío de Mensajes de Texto , Anciano , Humanos , Vacunas contra la Influenza/uso terapéutico , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Sistemas Recordatorios , Vacunación , Adulto Joven
18.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 112: 106649, 2022 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34896294

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Overtesting and treatment of older patients is common and may lead to harms. The Choosing Wisely campaign has provided recommendations to reduce overtesting and overtreatment of older adults. Behavioral economics-informed interventions embedded within the electronic health record (EHR) have been shown to reduce overuse in several areas. Our objective is to conduct a parallel arm, pragmatic cluster-randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral-economics-informed clinical decision support (CDS) interventions previously piloted in primary care clinics and designed to reduce overtesting and overtreatment in older adults. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial has two parallel arms: clinician education alone vs. clinician education plus behavioral-economics-informed CDS. There are three co-primary outcomes for this trial: (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in older men, (2) urine testing for non-specific reasons in older women, and (3) overtreatment of diabetes in older adults. All eligible primary care clinics from a large regional health system were randomized using a modified constrained randomization process and their attributed clinicians were included. Clinicians were recruited to complete a survey and educational module. We randomized 60 primary care clinics with 374 primary care clinicians and achieved adequate balance between the study arms for prespecified constrained variables. Baseline annual overuse rates for the three co-primary outcomes were 25%, 23%, and 17% for the PSA, urine, and diabetes measures, respectively. DISCUSSION: This trial is evaluating behavioral-economics-informed EHR-embedded interventions to reduce overuse of specific tests and treatments for older adults. The study will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of these interventions.


Asunto(s)
Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas , Diabetes Mellitus , Geriatría , Anciano , Economía del Comportamiento , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino
19.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 112: 106650, 2022 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34896295

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: High levels of opioid prescribing in the United States has resulted in an alarming trend in opioid-related harms. The objective of Trial 2 of the Application of Economics & Social psychology to improve Opioid Prescribing Safety (AESOPS-2) is to dampen the intensity and frequency of opioid prescribing in accordance with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendation to "go low and slow". We aim to accomplish this by notifying clinicians of harmful patient outcomes, which we expect to increase the mental availability of risks associated with opioid use. METHODS: The trial is multi-site. Random assignment determines if prescribers to persons who suffer an opioid overdose (fatal or nonfatal) learn of this event (intervention) or practice usual care (control). Clinicians in the intervention group receive a letter notifying them of their patient's overdose. The primary outcome is the change in clinician weekly milligram morphine equivalent (MME) prescribed in a 6-month period before and after receiving the letter. Additional outcomes are the change in the proportion of patients prescribed at least 50 daily MME and in the proportion of patients referred to medication assisted treatment. Group differences in these outcomes will be compared using an intent-to-treat difference-in-differences framework with a mixed-effects regression model to estimate clinician MME. DISCUSSION: The AESOPS-2 trial will provide new knowledge about whether increasing prescribers' awareness of patients' opioid-related overdoses leads to a reduction in opioid prescribing. Additionally, this trial may better inform how to reduce opioid use disorder and opioid overdoses by lowering population exposure to these drugs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04758637.


Asunto(s)
Sobredosis de Droga , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Sobredosis de Droga/prevención & control , Humanos , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/prevención & control , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Psicología Social , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estados Unidos
20.
Pediatrics ; 148(2)2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34321338

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: In a large health system, we evaluated the effectiveness of electronic health record patient portal reminders in increasing pediatric influenza vaccination rates. METHODS: We conducted an intention-to-treat randomized clinical trial of 22 046 children from 6 months to <18 years of age in 53 primary care practices. Patients (or parent and/or proxies) who were active portal users were randomly assigned to receive reminder messages framed as gains or losses or no messages. They were separately randomly assigned to receive a precommitment message before the influenza season. The primary outcome was receipt of ≥1 seasonal influenza vaccinations. Additionally, children 6 months to <3 years of age due for a second influenza vaccine were randomly assigned to receive a reminder or no reminder for the second vaccination. RESULTS: First-dose influenza vaccination rates were 56.9% in the control group, 58.0% in the loss-frame reminders group (P = .07), and 58.0% in the gain-frame group (P = .47). Rates were 58.3% in the precommitment group versus 57.0% in the control group (P = .11). Adjusted risk ratios for first vaccination were 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00-1.04) for loss-frame reminders, 1.01 (95% CI: 0.98-1.05) for gain-frame reminders, and 1.02 (95% CI: 1.00-1.04) for precommitment messages versus controls. Second-dose vaccination rates were 44.1% in the control group and 55.0% in the reminder group, with an adjusted risk ratio of 1.25 (95% CI: 1.07-1.45). CONCLUSIONS: Patient portal reminders for influenza vaccines in children, whether framed as gains or losses, did not increase first-dose influenza vaccination rates but were highly effective for the second dose of the vaccine.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Portales del Paciente , Sistemas Recordatorios , Adolescente , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Masculino , Método Simple Ciego
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...