Peer education as a strategy to promote vaccine acceptance: A randomized controlled trial within New York community healthcare practices.

BACKGROUND: Effective strategies are needed to improve vaccine acceptance. This study sought to determine if a peer-led vaccine education intervention embedded within community medical practices increases parental acceptance of pediatric pneumococcal conjugate vaccination. METHODS: From March 2022-July 2023, we conducted a randomized trial at three pediatric health practices in predominantly Hasidic Jewish neighborhoods in New York, where vaccine deferral is common. Parents of children up to 18 months due/overdue for routine pneumococcal vaccination were randomized (1:1) to receive routine care alone or routine care plus a peer educational intervention. Peer educators trained in motivational interviewing and vaccine science provided counseling at enrollment and follow-up telephone engagement in the intervention arm at day 30 and 60. Primary outcome was child's pneumococcal immunization status by allocation arm expressed as at least one dose received between enrollment and 90 days post-enrollment. RESULTS: 144 parent-child dyads were eligible for outcome analysis. Participants in the group receiving routine care along with peer-led vaccine counseling were significantly more likely to have their child receive at least 1 vaccine dose between enrollment and 90 days compared to the group who received routine care alone (28.4 % vs 12.9 %, risk ratio [RR] 2.21, confidence interval [CI] 1.09-4.49, p = 0.022). The effect of peer education was greatest in dyads with children less than 1 year old at enrollment (34 % vs 12.7 %, RR 2.67, CI (1.22-5.86), p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Peer vaccine education can increase vaccine acceptance compared to routine care alone and may be particularly valuable in decreasing vaccination delays for younger infants. (Funded by EGL Charitable Foundation, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05875779).

Impact of Ethno-racial Factors on Clinical Outcomes and Health Care Utilization in Chronic Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare disparities adversely affect clinical outcomes in racial and ethnic minorities. Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a complex disorder, and pressures for time and cost-containment may amplify the disparity for minorities in this condition. This study aimed to assess ethno-racial differences in the clinical outcomes of CP patients cared for at our institution. METHODS: This is a study of CP patients with available ethno-racial information followed at our pancreas center. We reviewed their demographics, comorbidities, clinical outcomes, and resource utilization: pain, frequent flares (≥ 2/year), local complications, psychosocial variables, exocrine, and endocrine insufficiency, imaging, endoscopic procedures, and surgeries. The outcomes underwent logistic regression to ascertain association(s) with covariates and were expressed as odds ratio (95% confidence intervals). RESULTS: Of the 445 CP patients, there were 23 Hispanics, 330 Non-Hispanic Whites, 47 Non-Hispanic Blacks, 16 Asian Americans, and 29 patients from Other/mixed races. Over a median follow-up of 7 years, no significant differences in the pain profile (p = 0.36), neuromodulator use (p = 0.94), and opioid use for intermittent (p = 0.34) and daily pain (p = 0.80) were observed. Frequent flares were associated with Hispanic ethnicity [2.98(1.20-7.36); p = 0.02], despite adjustment for smoking [2.21(1.11-4.41); p = 0.02)] and alcohol [1.88(1.06-3.35); p = 0.03]. Local complications (pseudocysts, mesenteric thrombosis, and biliary obstruction), exocrine and endocrine dysfunction, and healthcare resource utilization (cross-sectional imaging, endoscopic procedures, celiac blocks, or surgeries) were comparable across all ethno-racial groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although no significant differences in clinical outcomes, and health resource utilization were noted across ethno-racial groups, Hispanic ethnicity had significant association with CP flares. This study calls for further investigation of an understudied minority population with CP.

Impact of Geospatial Food Access on Acute Pancreatitis Outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Food access is an important social determinant of health and refers to geographical and infrastructural aspects of food availability. Using publicly available data on food access from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), geospatial analyses can identify regions with variable food access, which may impact acute pancreatitis (AP), an acute inflammatory condition characterized by unpredictable outcomes and substantial mortality. This study aimed to investigate the association of clinical outcomes in patients with AP with geospatial food access. METHODS: We examined AP-related hospitalizations at a tertiary center from January 2008 to December 2018. The physical addresses were geocoded through ArcGIS Pro2.7.0 (ESRI, Redlands, CA). USDA Food Access Research Atlas defined low food access as urban areas with 33% or more of the population residing over one mile from the nearest food source. Regression analyses enabled assessment of the association between AP outcomes and food access. RESULTS: The study included 772 unique patients with AP residing in Massachusetts with 931 AP-related hospitalizations. One hundred and ninety-eight (25.6%) patients resided in census tracts with normal urban food access and 574 (74.4%) patients resided in tracts with low food access. AP severity per revised Atlanta classification [OR 1.88 (95%CI 1.21-2.92); p = 0.005], and 30-day AP-related readmission [OR 1.78(95%CI 1.11-2.86); p = 0.02] had significant association with food access, despite adjustment for demographics, healthcare behaviors, and comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index). However, food access lacked significant association with AP-related mortality (p = 0.40) and length of stay (LOS: p = 0.99). CONCLUSION: Low food access had a significant association with 30-day AP-related readmissions and AP severity. However, mortality and LOS lacked significant association with food access. The association between nutrition, lifestyle, and AP outcomes warrants further prospective investigation.

Concurrent uterine surgery and uptake of hormone therapy in patients undergoing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for risk-reducing or therapeutic indications.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze factors associated with concurrent uterine surgery in patients undergoing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) for risk reducing or therapeutic purposes. Additionally, trends in surgical choice and uptake of post-operative hormone therapy (HT) were examined. METHODS: A 10-year retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent risk-reducing or therapeutic BSO at one institution. Multinomial regression analysis of patient and case characteristics was performed evaluating associations with surgery type (BSO, BSO and hysterectomy, or BSO and endometrial sampling). Trends in surgery type and uptake of HT post operatively are described. RESULTS: Among the study sample of 643 patients, 140 (22%) patients underwent therapeutic BSO for a history of hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer, while the remainder underwent risk-reducing BSO due to a pathogenic variant and/or family history. Pathogenic variants included BRCA1 (141, 40%) BRCA2 (173, 49%), and Lynch syndrome genes (15, 4%). Regression analysis revealed significant associations between concurrent hysterectomy and Black race (RR = 3.55, CI = 1.51-8.38, p = 0.004), history of HR positive breast cancer (RR = 1.88, CI = 1.03-3.42, p = 0.04), and surgeon (Surgeon 1, RR = 2.43, CI = 1.36-4.35, p = 0.003). Among eligible patients under age 51, 36% initiated HT. Over the study period, concurrent hysterectomy rates declined while endometrial sampling increased. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of hysterectomy declined over the study period and slightly more than one-third of eligible patients utilized post-operative HT. Further research on concurrent uterine surgery is needed to establish standardized treatment recommendations in the risk-reducing and therapeutic BSO population. Additionally, education regarding the benefits of postoperative HT in eligible patients is warranted.

Six-Month Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized with Severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has demonstrated that patients experience functional decline at 1-3 months post-discharge after COVID-19 hospitalization. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether symptoms persist further or improve over time, we followed patients discharged after hospitalization for severe COVID-19 to characterize their overall health status and their physical and mental health at 6 months post-hospital discharge. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥ 18 years hospitalized for COVID-19 at a single health system, who required at minimum 6 l of supplemental oxygen during admission, had intact baseline functional status, and were discharged alive. MAIN MEASURES: Overall health status, physical health, mental health, and dyspnea were assessed with validated surveys: the PROMIS® Global Health-10 and PROMIS® Dyspnea Characteristics instruments. KEY RESULTS: Of 152 patients who completed the 1 month post-discharge survey, 126 (83%) completed the 6-month survey. Median age of 6-month respondents was 62; 40% were female. Ninety-three (74%) patients reported that their health had not returned to baseline at 6 months, and endorsed a mean of 7.1 symptoms. Participants' summary t-scores in both the physical health and mental health domains at 6 months (45.2, standard deviation [SD] 9.8; 47.4, SD 9.8, respectively) remained lower than their baseline (physical health 53.7, SD 9.4; mental health 54.2, SD 8.0; p<0.001). Overall, 79 (63%) patients reported shortness of breath within the prior week (median score 2 out of 10 (interquartile range [IQR] 0-5), vs 42 (33%) pre-COVID-19 infection (0, IQR 0-1)). A total of 11/124 (9%) patients without pre-COVID oxygen requirements still needed oxygen 6 months post-hospital discharge. One hundred and seven (85%) were still experiencing fatigue at 6 months post-discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Even 6 months after hospital discharge, the majority of patients report that their health has not returned to normal. Support and treatments to return these patients back to their pre-COVID baseline are urgently needed.

Post-Discharge Health Status and Symptoms in Patients with Severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about long-term recovery from severe COVID-19 disease. Here, we characterize overall health, physical health, and mental health of patients 1 month after discharge for severe COVID-19. METHODS: This was a prospective single health system observational cohort study of patients ≥ 18 years hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 disease who required at least 6 l of oxygen during admission, had intact baseline cognitive and functional status, and were discharged alive. Participants were enrolled between 30 and 40 days after discharge. Outcomes were elicited through validated survey instruments: the PROMIS® Dyspnea Characteristics and PROMIS® Global Health-10. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients (40.6% of eligible) were enrolled; 152 (38.3%) completed the survey. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50-67); 57 (37%) were female. Overall, 113/152 (74%) participants reported shortness of breath within the prior week (median score 3 out of 10 [IQR 0-5]), vs 47/152 (31%) pre-COVID-19 infection (0, IQR 0-1), p < 0.001. Participants also rated their physical health and mental health as worse in their post-COVID state (43.8, standard deviation 9.3; mental health 47.3, SD 9.3) compared to their pre-COVID state, (54.3, SD 9.3; 54.3, SD 7.8, respectively), both p < 0.001. Physical and mental health means in the general US population are 50 (SD 10). A total of 52/148 (35.1%) patients without pre-COVID oxygen requirements needed home oxygen after hospital discharge; 20/148 (13.5%) reported still using oxygen at time of survey. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe COVID-19 disease typically experience sequelae affecting their respiratory status, physical health, and mental health for at least several weeks after hospital discharge.

Post-discharge health status and symptoms in patients with severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about long-term recovery from severe COVID-19 disease. Here, we characterize overall health, physical health and mental health of patients one month after discharge for severe COVID-19. METHODS: This was a prospective single health system observational cohort study of patients ≥18 years hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 disease who required at least 6 liters of oxygen during admission, had intact baseline cognitive and functional status and were discharged alive. Participants were enrolled between 30 and 40 days after discharge. Outcomes were elicited through validated survey instruments: the PROMIS Dyspnea Characteristics and PROMIS Global Health-10. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients (40.6% of eligible) were enrolled; 152 (38.3%) completed the survey. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50-67); 57 (37%) were female. Overall, 113/152 (74%) participants reported shortness of breath within the prior week (median score 3 out of 10 [IQR 0-5]), vs. 47/152 (31%) pre-COVID-19 infection (0, IQR 0-1), p<0.001. Participants also rated their physical health and mental health as worse in their post-COVID state (43.8, standard deviation 9.3; mental health 47.3, SD 9.3) compared to their pre-COVID state, (54.3, SD 9.3; 54.3, SD 7.8, respectively), both p <0.001. A total of 52/148 (35.1%) patients without pre-COVID oxygen requirements needed home oxygen after hospital discharge; 20/148 (13.5%) reported still using oxygen at time of survey. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe COVID-19 disease typically experience sequelae affecting their respiratory status, physical health and mental health for at least several weeks after hospital discharge.

Common parenting misconceptions regarding infant care: setting the record straight for parents (and some pediatricians).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: First-time parents often turn to friends and family for advice regarding feeding, sleeping, bathing, diapering and toilet training, and childhood illnesses. Unfortunately, parents may at times be given incorrect and potentially dangerous advice as several widely embraced parenting practices are no longer deemed appropriate. In addition, young children are cared for by family and friends - many of whom are older and may still subscribe to outdated parenting practices.Parents and grandparents are not the only ones who subscribe to child care myths and misconceptions. Pediatricians also believe in the effectiveness of some outdated child care practices. Although some of these parenting myths are relatively benign, others may indeed pose a significant health risk or safety hazard to a young child. The purpose of this article is to review 10 commonly held myths or misconceptions regarding infant care. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review article, we not only highlight many of the studies that document which outdated health beliefs are still endorsed by parents and/or pediatricians, but also review the specific health risks associated with these parenting myths or misconceptions. SUMMARY: It is important that pediatricians educate parents and other primary caregivers about the potential risks of following outdated parenting practices.

Morbidity and mortality after treatment of Ewing sarcoma: A single-institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Children, adolescents, and young adults treated for Ewing sarcoma (ES) are at risk for disease-related and treatment-related complications. We aimed to describe early and late overall mortality, cause-specific mortality, and key adverse health outcomes in a large, single-institutional cohort of patients with ES. METHODS: Patients with ES diagnosed at age less than 40 years and treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering between 1974 and 2012 were included. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazards were used to examine the association of clinical and pathologic variables with overall survival. Cause-specific mortality was evaluated with the cumulative incidence function accounting for competing risks. RESULTS: Three hundred patients with ES (60.3% male; median age at diagnosis: 16.8 years [range: 0.3-39]; 30.0% with metastatic disease at diagnosis) were followed for a median of 7.8 years (range: 0.2-37). Five-year overall survival was 65.2% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 59.8-71.1%) for the entire cohort; 78.6% for those with localized disease; 40.1% for those with isolated pulmonary metastases; and 28.1% for those with extrapulmonary metastases. In multivariable analysis, older age at diagnosis, minority race/ethnicity, and metastatic disease at diagnosis were associated with inferior survival. Ten-year cumulative incidence of relapse/progression was 40.1%, with eight late relapses occurring at a median of 6.3 years after diagnosis (range: 5-14). Seventeen patients developed subsequent neoplasms (treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myelogenous leukemia = 9; solid tumors = 6; nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC] = 4). Excluding NMSC and melanoma in situ, the cumulative incidence of subsequent malignant neoplasms at 25 years was 15% (95% CI, 4.8-25.1%). CONCLUSION: Patients with ES are at high risk for relapse/progression and second cancers.