A Cross-Sectional Survey Study of Cannabis Use for Fibromyalgia Symptom Management.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of cannabis as a symptom management strategy for patients with fibromyalgia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic, cross-sectional survey was conducted among patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia and treated in Integrative Medicine & Health at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. The survey was constructed with the Symptom Management Theory tool and was sent anonymously via web-based software to patients with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Of 5234 patients with fibromyalgia sent the online survey, 1336 (25.5%) responded and met the inclusion criteria. Survey respondents had a median age of 48 (Q1-Q3: 37.5-58.0) years, and most identified as female. Nearly half of respondents (49.5%, n=661) reported cannabis use since their fibromyalgia diagnosis. The most common symptoms for which respondents reported using cannabis were pain (98.9%, n=654); fatigue (96.2%; n=636); stress, anxiety, or depression (93.9%; n=621); and insomnia (93.6%; n=619). Improvement in pain symptoms with cannabis use was reported by 82.0% (n=536). Most cannabis-using respondents reported that cannabis also improved symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression and of insomnia. CONCLUSION: Considering that cannabis is a popular choice among patients for managing fibromyalgia symptoms, clinicians should have adequate knowledge of cannabis when discussing therapeutic options for fibromyalgia with their patients.

Coronary Reactivity Assessment Is Associated With Lower Health Care-Associated Costs in Patients Presenting With Angina and Nonobstructive Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: The financial burden linked to the diagnosis and treatment of patients with chest pain on the health care system is considerable. Angina and nonobstructive coronary artery disease (ANOCA) is common, associated with adverse cardiovascular events, and may lead to repeat testing or hospitalizations. Diagnostic certainty can be achieved in patients with ANOCA using coronary reactivity testing (CRT); however, its financial effect on the patient has not been studied. Our goal was to assess the effect of CRT on health care-related cost in patients with ANOCA. METHODS: Patients with ANOCA who underwent diagnostic coronary angiography (CAG) and CRT (CRT group) were matched to controls who had similar presentation but only underwent a CAG without CRT (CAG group). Standardized inflation-adjusted costs were collected and compared between the 2 groups on an annual basis for 2 years post the index date (CRT or CAG). RESULTS: Two hundred seven CRT and 207 CAG patients were included in the study with an average age of 52.3±11.5 years and 76% females. The total cost was significantly higher in the CAG group as compared with the CRT group ($37 804 [$26 933-$48 674] versus $13 679 [$9447-$17 910]; P<0.001). When costs are itemized and divided based on the Berenson-Eggers Type of Service categorization, the largest cost difference occurred in imaging (any type, including CAG; P<0.001), procedures (eg, percutaneous coronary intervention/coronary artery bypass grafting/thrombectomy) (P=0.001), and test (eg, blood tests, EKG; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective observational study, assessment of CRT in patients with ANOCA was associated with significantly reduced annual total costs and health care utilization. Therefore, the study may support the integration of CRT into clinical practice.

Comparative costs for critically ill patients with limited English proficiency versus English proficiency.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct comparative cost analysis of hospital care for critically ill patients with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) versus patients with English proficiency (controls). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study using propensity matching at Mayo Clinic Rochester, a quaternary care academic center. We included hospitalized patients who had at least one admission to ICU during a 10-year period between 1/1/2008-12/31/2017. RESULTS: Due to substantial differences in baseline characteristics of the groups, propensity matching for the covariates age, sex, race, ethnicity, APACHE 3 score, and Charlson Comorbidity score was used, and we achieved the intended balance. The final cohort included 80,404 patients, 4,246 with LEP and 76,158 controls. Patients with LEP had higher costs during hospital admission to discharge, with a mean cost difference of $3861 (95% CI $822 to $6900, p = 0.013) and also higher costs during index ICU admission to hospital discharge, with a mean cost difference of $3166 (95% CI $231 to $6101, p = 0.035). A propensity matched cohort including only those that survived showed those with LEP had significantly greater mean costs for all outcomes. Sensitivity analysis revealed that international patients with LEP had significantly greater overall hospital costs of $9,240 than patients with LEP who resided in the US (95% CI $3341 to $15,140, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate significantly higher costs for patients with LEP experiencing a critical illness. The causes for this may be increased healthcare utilization secondary to communication deficiencies that impede timely decision making about care.

Comorbid extra-intestinal central sensitization conditions worsen irritable bowel syndrome in primary care patients.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is characterized as a central sensitization syndrome (CSS), a group of conditions including fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue, and restless leg syndrome (RLS) among others with frequent comorbidities of anxiety, depression, and chemical sensitivity. The prevalence of comorbid conditions and their impact on IBS symptom severity and quality of life in rural community populations has not been described. METHODS: We administered a cross-sectional survey to patients with a documented CSS diagnosis in rural primary care practices to evaluate the relationship between CSS diagnoses, quality of life, symptom severity, and interactions with healthcare providers utilizing validated questionnaires. Subgroup analysis was performed on the IBS cohort. Mayo Clinic IRB approved the study. KEY RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy-five individuals out of 5000 completed the survey (15.5% response rate) with 264 (34%) reporting IBS. Only 3% (n = 8) of IBS patients reported IBS alone without comorbid CSS condition. Most respondents reported overlapping migraine (196, 74%), depression (183, 69%), anxiety (171, 64%), and fibromyalgia (139, 52%). IBS patients with more than two comorbid CS condition showed significantly higher symptom severity with linear increase. Quality of life was lower in IBS with comorbid conditions, particularly in patients with IBS and RLS (mean EQ5-D 0.36 vs. 0.8 in IBS only, p < 0.01). Quality of life declined as number of comorbid conditions increased. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Patients with IBS often have multiple CS disorders which increases symptom severity and lowers quality of life. Understanding the impact of multiple CSS diagnoses and treating these as a global condition may improve patient experience.

Patient preferences for telehealth services in a large multispecialty practice.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth service provision has accelerated during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. As the pandemic continues, clinical practices have discovered ways to resume operations. Opportunities exist to understand patient preferences for telehealth clinical services and to tailor offerings to different demographic groups. METHODS: We conducted a survey of patients receiving telehealth services through our outpatient practice to understand the types of healthcare services for which patients report preferences for telehealth. RESULTS: We received 551 survey responses (response rate = 20.8%; 551/2650). More than half of patients indicated being 'very likely' to use telehealth services to refill medication(s) (67.3%), prepare for an upcoming visit (66.1%), review test results (60.3%), or receive education (54.2%). Males had lower odds of preferring telehealth services for reviewing test results (odds ratio (OR) = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.34-0.94) or mental health issues (OR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.38-0.77). Respondents who received a video visit were significantly more likely than those who received a telephone visit to report preferences for using telehealth for education, care plan discussions, long-term health issues, and mental health. DISCUSSION: Patient preferences for telehealth services vary by services provided and respondent demographics. Experience with telehealth increases the likelihood for future use of these services.

Outcomes of Mayo Clinic reBoot camps for postimplementation training in the electronic health record.

OBJECTIVE: After a new electronic health record (EHR) was implemented at Mayo Clinic, a training program called reBoot Camp was created to enhance ongoing education in response to needs identified by physician leaders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A reBoot camp focused on EHR topics pertinent to ambulatory care was offered from April 2018 through June 2020. There were 37 2-day sessions and 43 1-day sessions, with 673 unique participants. To evaluate outcomes of the reBoot camp, we used survey data to study baseline, immediate, and long-term perceptions of program satisfaction and self-assessed skills with the EHR. The study was conducted among practitioners at a large ambulatory practice network based in several states. Data were collected from April 2018 through January 2021. We analyzed automatically collected metadata and scores that evaluated the amount of personalization and proficiency of use. RESULTS: Confidence in skills increased by 13.5 points for general EHR use and was significant in 5 subdomains of use (13-18 point improvement). This degree of user confidence was maintained at the 6-month reassessment. The outcomes of configuration and proficiency scores also improved significantly. DISCUSSION: Ongoing education regarding EHR tools is necessary to support continued use of technology. This study was novel because of the amount and breadth of data collected, diversity of user participation, and validation that improvements were maintained over time. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in a reBoot camp significantly improved user confidence in each domain of the EHR and demonstrated use of best-practice tools. Users maintained gains at the 6-month evaluation phase.

Central Sensitization Symptom Severity and Patient-Provider Relationships in a Community Setting.

INTRODUCTION: Central sensitization syndromes (CSS) comprise an overlapping group of clinical conditions with the core feature of "pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system." Patients with CSS are known to have challenging interactions with healthcare providers contributing to psychological distress and increased healthcare utilization. CSS symptom severity has been associated with psychologic comorbidities, but little is known about how symptom severity relates to provider interactions. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey among patients with CSS in our primary care practices to examine the relationship between CSS symptom severity and experiences with doctors. RESULTS: A total of 775 respondents completed the survey (775/5000; 15.5%) with 72% reporting high CSS symptom severity. About 44% of respondents had a prior diagnosis of fibromyalgia, 72% had migraines, and 28% had IBS. Patients with high CSS symptom severity were more likely to report that doctor(s) had often/always told them that they don't need treatment when they feel like they do (OR = 3.6, 95% CI 1.9-7.5), that doctor(s) often/always don't understand them (OR = 3.1, 95% CI 1.9-5.4), and that doctor(s) often/always seem annoyed with them when compared with respondents with low-moderate CSS symptom severity (OR = 4.8, 95% CI 2.2-12.5). Patients with high CSS symptom severity were at greater than 5 times odds of reporting being told that their symptoms were "all in their head" when compared to patients with low-moderate symptom severity (OR = 5.4, 95% CI 3.3-9.0). CONCLUSION: Patients with CSS spectrum disorders experience frequent pain and decreased quality of life. A high degree of CSS symptom severity is associated with negative experiences with healthcare providers, which deters the establishment of a positive provider-patient relationship. Further research is needed to help understand symptom severity in CSS and harness the power of the therapeutic alliance as a treatment modality.

Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Bamlanivimab and Casirivimab-Imdevimab Among High-Risk Patients With Mild to Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab are authorized for treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in high-risk patients. We compared the outcomes of patients who received these therapies to identify factors associated with hospitalization and other clinical outcomes. METHODS: Adult patients who received monoclonal antibody from 19 November 2020 to 11 February 2021 were selected and divided into those who received bamlanivimab (n = 2747) and casirivimab-imdevimab (n = 849). The 28-day all-cause and COVID-19-related hospitalizations were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The population included 3596 patients; the median age was 62 years, and 50% were female. All had ≥1 medical comorbidity; 55% had multiple comorbidities. All-cause and COVID-19-related hospitalization rates at 28 days were 3.98% and 2.56%, respectively. After adjusting for medical comorbidities, there was no significant difference in all-cause and COVID-19-related hospitalization rates between bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab (adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval], 1.4 [.9-2.2] and 1.6 [.8-2.7], respectively). Chronic kidney, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and immunocompromised status were associated with higher likelihood of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study on the use of bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab in high-risk patients showed similarly low rates of hospitalization. The number and type of medical comorbidities are associated with hospitalizations after monoclonal antibody treatment.

Comparative Cost Effectiveness of Reflux-Based and Reflux-Independent Strategies for Barrett's Esophagus Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive tests for Barrett's esophagus (BE) detection have raised the prospect of broader nonreflux-based testing. Cost-effectiveness studies have largely studied men aged 50 years with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms. We evaluated the comparative cost effectiveness of BE screening tests in GERD-based and GERD-independent testing scenarios. METHODS: Markov modeling was performed in 3 scenarios in 50 years old individuals: (i) White men with chronic GERD (GERD-based); (ii) GERD-independent (all races, men and women), BE prevalence 1.6%; and (iii) GERD-independent, BE prevalence 5%. The simulation compared multiple screening strategies with no screening: sedated endoscopy (sEGD), transnasal endoscopy, swallowable esophageal cell collection devices with biomarkers, and exhaled volatile organic compounds. A hypothetical cohort of 500,000 individuals followed for 40 years using a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was simulated. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing each strategy with no screening and comparing screening strategies with each other were calculated. RESULTS: In both GERD-independent scenarios, most non-sEGD BE screening tests were cost effective. Swallowable esophageal cell collection devices with biomarkers were cost effective (<$35,000/QALY) and were the optimal screening tests in all scenarios. Exhaled volatile organic compounds had the highest ICERs in all scenarios. ICERs were low (<$25,000/QALY) for all tests in the GERD-based scenario, and all non-sEGD tests dominated no screening. ICERs were sensitive to BE prevalence and test costs. DISCUSSION: Minimally invasive nonendoscopic tests may make GERD-independent BE screening cost effective. Participation rates for these strategies need to be studied.

Influence of Social and Cultural Factors on the Decision to Consent for Monoclonal Antibody Treatment among High-Risk Patients with Mild-Moderate COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The clinical outcomes of patients who decline anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is not known. Factors associated with the decision to accept or decline the offer for anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies are not established. This study aimed to identify factors impacting the decision to consent for monoclonal antibody therapies and assess the differences in clinical outcomes of patients who accepted compared to those who declined these therapies. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study enrolled 2820 adult patients who were offered monoclonal antibody therapies, bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab, for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic in the Midwest between 11/19/2020 and 12/31/2020. The primary endpoint is the decision to accept or decline monoclonal antibody treatment. Secondary endpoints were patient-level factors that could have impacted the decision to accept treatment (age, gender, race, ethnicity, primary language spoken, and medical comorbidities). The main clinical endpoint was hospitalization within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: 59.1% (n = 1669) chose to accept monoclonal antibody therapy, and 40.9% (n = 1151) chose to decline the offer for treatment. Patients were more likely to accept treatment if they were non-Hispanic White, English speaking, identified a spouse or life partner, had a religious affiliation, and possessed more medical comorbidities. Overall, 28-day hospitalization rate was 2.6% (n = 72/2820) and was higher among those who declined (3.3%) than those who accepted monoclonal antibody therapy (2.0%; Rate Ratio = 0.62, 95% Confidence Interval, 0.39-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Despite having more comorbidities, patients who accepted monoclonal antibody treatments had a lower rate of hospitalization compared to patients who declined treatment. Several social and cultural factors were associated with the decision to decline therapy, including race, language, ethnicity, and lack of social support. These findings can inform public health efforts to reduce social disparities in the treatment of COVID-19 and increase utilization of monoclonal antibody therapies in high risk populations.

Electronic Vaping Product Use among Young Adults Who Receive Care at a Major Medical Institution.

Background: National estimates of electronic vaping product (EVP) use exist, but little is known about young adult EVP users who interact with the healthcare setting. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of 18-25 year olds receiving care in our ambulatory medical practice. Population differences were evaluated with the chi square test reporting unadjusted odds ratios (ORs). Results: Response rate was 16.6% (n = 1,017/6,119). The prevalence of ever EVP use was 46.0% of whom 13.9% used every day. Each additional day of alcohol use (past 30 days) was associated with increased odds of being an EVP user (OR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.09), and cannabis use (past 30 days) was associated with a higher odds of being an EVP user compared to non-cannabis users (OR = 40.0, 95% CI 17.4 - 111.8). Observing a biological parent (OR = 2.89, 95% CI 1.98-4.24), step parent (OR = 2.03, 95% CI 1.02-4.19) and full sibling (OR = 2.31, 95% CI 1.78-3.00) using inhaled substances (past 30 days) was associated with increased odds of being an ever EVP user. Ever EVP users had lower odds than never users to report that EVPs with nicotine are "a little" or "a lot" more harmful than smoking "regular" tobacco cigarettes (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.37 - 0.76). Conclusion: Our survey is limited by a low response rate but confirms observed associations between EVP use and substance use and social influences. Our data also suggest that professionals should regularly screen for EVP use among young people, especially those with exposure to family members who used inhaled substances.

Changes in substance use among young adults during a respiratory disease pandemic.

BACKGROUND: News articles, commentaries, and opinion articles have suggested that ongoing social distancing measures coupled with economic challenges during COVID-19 may worsen stress, affective state, and substance use across the globe. We sought to advance our understanding of the differences between individuals who change their substance use patterns during a public health crisis and those who do not. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of young adults (18-25 years of age) assessing respondent characteristics and vaping, tobacco, alcohol, and/or marijuana use. We calculated prevalence estimates, prevalence changes, and prevalence ratios with associated 95% confidence intervals and looked for differences with the chi-square test. RESULTS: Of the total sample, 53.2% (n = 542/1018) young adults reported vaping or using tobacco, alcohol, and/or marijuana. Among the 542 respondents reporting use, 34.3% reported a change in their use patterns. Among respondents reporting changes in substance use patterns during the pandemic (n = 186), 68.8% reported an increase in alcohol use, 44.0% reported a decrease in vaping product use, and 47.3% reported a decrease in tobacco product use due to COVID-19. Substance use changed significantly for respondents with increasing degree of loneliness (continuous loneliness score: prevalence ratio = 1.12, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-1.25), anxiety (prevalence ratio = 1.45, 95% confidence interval = 1.14-1.85), and depression (prevalence ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval = 1.13-1.82). CONCLUSION: Self-reported substance use among young adults was observed to change during a pandemic, and the degree of loneliness appears to impact these changes. Innovative strategies are needed to address loneliness, anxiety, depression, and substance use during global health crises that impact social contact.

Loneliness and Migraine Self-Management: A Cross-Sectional Assessment.

Background: Chronic illness is often comorbid with the psychological state of loneliness. Models of care for patients who experience chronic migraines may often lack an understanding of psychosocial influences of the illness. Addressing the effects of loneliness on the health behaviors of chronic migraine patients may further elucidate gaps in care that exist beyond the biomedical approach to migraine treatment. The primary aim of this study was to assess the relationship between loneliness and behavioral health decisions in chronic migraine patients, specifically patient ability to self-manage, and effectiveness of treatments. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among patients (n = 500) with migraine and assessed for the experience of loneliness by using the University of California, Los Angeles-Revised (UCLA-R) Three-item Loneliness Scale and the extent of migraine-related disability via the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS). Furthermore, we evaluated patients for their ability to self-manage their migraines, and perceived effectiveness of treatment. Results: Nearly half of our population reported at least one measure of loneliness (230/500, 46.0%). Patients experiencing chronic migraine were statistically more likely to report feeling lonely when compared to patients with episodic migraines (P < .001). Patients who report loneliness had lower odds of feeling 'very satisfied" with their ability to self-manage their migraine symptoms (aOR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.81) and had lower odds of feeling "very satisfied" with their ability to avoid conditions that cause their headache (aOR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.91). Conclusions: Loneliness has significant effects on the illness experience of patients with chronic migraines, including their ability to self-manage or be satisfied with their current state of care. Psychosocial models of care that address loneliness among patients with chronic migraine may help improve health outcomes and management.

Variation in Patient Experience Across the Clinic Day: a Multilevel Assessment of Four Primary Care Practices.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction with healthcare is associated with clinical outcomes, provider satisfaction, and success of healthcare organizations. As the clinic day progresses, provider fatigue, deterioration with communication within the care team, and appointment spillover may decrease patient experience. OBJECTIVE: To understand the relationship between likelihood to recommend a primary care practice and scheduled appointment time across multiple practice settings. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort was created of all patients seen within four primary care practices between July 1, 2016, and September 30, 2017. MAIN MEASURES: We looked at scheduled appointment time against patient likelihood to recommend a practice as a measure of overall patient experience collected routinely for clinical practice improvement by the Press Ganey Medical Practice Survey®. Adjusted mixed effects logistic regression models were created to understand the relationship between progressing appointment time on patient likelihood to recommend a practice. We constructed locally weighted smoothing (LOESS) curves to understand how reported patient experience varied over the clinic day. RESULTS: We had a response rate of 14.0% (n = 3172), 80.2% of whom indicated they would recommend our practice to others. Appointment time scheduling during the last hour (4:00-4:59 PM) had a 45% lower odds of recommending our practice when compared to the first clinic hour (adjusted OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.35-0.86) which is similar when controlling for patient-reported wait time (aOR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.37-0.95). LOESS plots demonstrated declining satisfaction with subsequent appointment times compared with the first session hour, with no effect just after the lunch hour break. CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, appointment time of day is associated with patient-reported experience.

Episodic and Chronic Migraine in Primary Care.

OBJECTIVE: To inform migraine care model development by assessing differences between patients with chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) in the current state of treatment, disability, patient satisfaction, and quality improvement opportunities. BACKGROUND: Efficient and focused use of scarce resources will be needed to address challenges within large populations of migraine patients. METHODS: We deployed a cross-sectional survey study of randomly selected migraine patients within a community primary care practice. RESULTS: There were 516 survey respondents (516/1804 [30%] response rate). CM patients were more likely than EM patients to report care from a neurologist (76/110 [69%] vs 229/406 [56%]; P = .0026), and higher disability according to the Migraine Disability Assessment and Headache Impact Test - 6 questionnaires (P < .0001). CM patients were less likely than EM patients to report overall satisfaction with care (16/110 [38%] vs 156/406 [66%], P = .0002), satisfaction with access to care (17/110 [33%] vs 176/406 [68%], P < .0001), and advice they needed (16/110 [31%] vs 160/406 [62%], P < .0001). Most patients with migraine had been offered triptan medications 377/516 (78%). Overall, 156/516 (31%) of individuals were currently taking any medication for migraine prevention, and 208/516 (40%) including botulinum toxin injections. CM patients were more likely to be taking preventive medication (39/110 [36%] vs 117/406 [29%], P = .0191) and report familiarity with the diagnosis of medication-overuse headache than patients with EM (80/110 [81%] vs 256/406 [69%], P = .0178). CONCLUSIONS: We observed differences between patients with chronic and EM and expected care delivery improvement opportunities for migraine patients in primary care. CM patients report higher levels of disability and less satisfaction with access to perceived needed medical advice and care. These findings support the need to further develop and study novel care models to efficiently and effectively deliver high-quality care and expertise in limited supply to a diverse migraine population.

Improved Self-Acceptance, Quality of Life, and Stress Level from Participation in a Worksite Yoga Foundations Program: A Pilot Study.

Yoga is increasing in popularity in the United States and across the globe. However, most yoga programs are provided outside the worksite; although many companies offer worksite wellness programs, at present there is limited documentation regarding the potential benefits of participating in a worksite yoga program. Therefore, the purpose of this project was to examine the potential effect of a worksite yoga program on self-acceptance, quality of life, and perceived stress. A prospective cohort pilot study that examined a structured worksite yoga program was designed and tailored to individuals new to yoga. The 8-week Yoga Foundations program was conducted at an academic medical center's worksite wellness center with 86 subjects. Outcome measures were the 36-item Self-Acceptance Scale; a six-item quality-of-life measure that assesses overall, social, mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being; and the ten-item Perceived Stress Scale. Participants demonstrated significant improvement in their overall self-acceptance ( p < 0.001), quality of life ( p < 0.001), and perceived stress ( p < 0.001) levels. They also highly rated the yoga instructors and the weekly format of the program. Participation in a Yoga Foundations program was associated with improvements in self-acceptance, quality of life and stress levels in worksite wellness center members. Future studies should use randomized designs and examine other wellness domains to learn more about the potential benefits of worksite yoga programs.

Improving Resiliency in Healthcare Employees.

OBJECTIVES: The high prevalence of stress at the workplace has been well documented; however, few studies have investigated the efficacy of worksite resiliency programs. Therefore, the objec- tive of this project was to examine the impact of a worksite resilience training program on improving resiliency and health behaviors in healthcare employees. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2016, 137 adult wellness center members of a healthcare institution participating in a single-arm cohort study of a 12-week resiliency training program were assessed at baseline, end of intervention, and at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Statistically significant (p ≤ .01) improvements were seen at the end of the intervention and extending to 3 months follow-up for resiliency, perceived stress, anxiety level, quality of life, and health behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the premise that worksite programs designed to improve resiliency in healthcare employees have efficacy in improving resiliency, quality of life and health behaviors. Given the importance of stress and burnout in healthcare employees, future randomized studies are warranted to determine more clearly the impacts of this type of resiliency intervention for improving the wellness of healthcare workers.

Validating the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-Management (PETS), a patient-reported measure of treatment burden, in people with diabetes.

AIMS: To validate a comprehensive general measure of treatment burden, the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-Management (PETS), in people with diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey study with 120 people diagnosed with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and at least one additional chronic illness. Surveys included established patient-reported outcome measures and a 48-item version of the PETS, a new measure comprised of multi-item scales assessing the burden of chronic illness treatment and self-care as it relates to nine domains: medical information, medications, medical appointments, monitoring health, interpersonal challenges, health care expenses, difficulty with health care services, role activity limitations, and physical/mental exhaustion from self-management. Internal reliability of PETS scales was determined using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was determined through correlation of PETS scores with established measures (measures of chronic condition distress, medication satisfaction, self-efficacy, and global well-being), and known-groups validity through comparisons of PETS scores across clinically distinct groups. In an exploratory test of predictive validity, step-wise regressions were used to determine which PETS scales were most associated with outcomes of chronic condition distress, overall physical and mental health, and medication adherence. RESULTS: Respondents were 37-88 years old, 59% female, 29% non-white, and 67% college-educated. PETS scales showed good reliability (Cronbach's alphas ≥0.74). Higher PETS scale scores (greater treatment burden) were correlated with more chronic condition distress, less medication convenience, lower self-efficacy, and worse general physical and mental health. Participants less (versus more) adherent to medications and those with more (versus fewer) health care financial difficulties had higher mean PETS scores. Medication burden was the scale that was most consistently associated with well-being and patient-reported adherence. CONCLUSION: The PETS is a reliable and valid measure for assessing perceived treatment burden in people coping with diabetes.

A Worksite Wellness Intervention: Improving Happiness, Life Satisfaction, and Gratitude in Health Care Workers.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a 12-week Stress Management and Resilience Training (SMART) program on happiness, life satisfaction, gratitude, mindfulness, spirituality, and stress in health care workers. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Participants were members of an employee wellness center at an academic health care center. Participants were enrolled as cohorts of 12 to 18 individuals and received the intervention at an employee wellness center from February 19, 2013, to February 27, 2017. The study was designed as a prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm clinical trial that included a 3-month in-person SMART program (defined as the intervention), with an additional 3-month postintervention follow-up period (6 months total). Outcomes were assessed at baseline (T0), end of intervention (T3), and after the postintervention follow-up period (T6) and included Subjective Happiness Survey, Satisfaction with Life Scale, Gratitude Scale, Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Spiritual Well-Being, and Perceived Stress Scale. RESULTS: Of the 110 participants who enrolled and provided consent, 98 participants (89%) completed the T0 and T3 assessments and 85 participants (77%) completed the T0, T3, and T6 assessments. On comparing the T0 and T6 responses, we observed statistically significant improvements (P<.001) in all the domains studied: subjective happiness (baseline average, 4.6; T6 average, 5.5; average difference, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6-1.0), life satisfaction (baseline average, 22.8; T6 average, 27.5; average difference, 4.7; 95% CI, 3.6-5.9); gratitude (baseline average, 35.8; T6 average, 39.3; average difference, 3.5; 95% CI, 2.6-4.5), mindfulness (baseline average, 3.5; T6 average, 4.2; average difference, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Spiritual Well-Being (baseline average, 29.9; T6 average, 37.4; average difference, 7.5; 95% CI, 6.0-9.2), and percentage of people reporting high stress (baseline, 97.6%; T6, 67.1%). Similar results were observed when comparing the T0 and T3 responses. CONCLUSION: In health care workers, training in the SMART program was associated with statistically significant improvements in happiness, satisfaction with life, gratitude, mindfulness, spirituality, and stress (P<.001). Given the importance of stress in the workplace, larger randomized trials and broader dissemination of the program in health care workers is warranted.

Development and validation of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS): a patient-reported measure of treatment burden.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a new comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden-the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS). METHODS: A conceptual framework was used to derive the PETS with items reviewed and cognitively tested with patients. A survey battery, including a pilot version of the PETS, was mailed to 838 multi-morbid patients from two healthcare institutions for validation. RESULTS: A total of 332 multi-morbid patients returned completed surveys. Diagnostics supported deletion and consolidation of some items and domains. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a domain model for scaling comprised of 9 factors: medical information, medications, medical appointments, monitoring health, interpersonal challenges, medical/healthcare expenses, difficulty with healthcare services, role/social activity limitations, and physical/mental exhaustion. Scales showed good internal consistency (α range 0.79-0.95). Higher PETS scores, indicative of greater treatment burden, were correlated with more distress, less satisfaction with medications, lower self-efficacy, worse physical and mental health, and lower convenience of healthcare (Ps < 0.001). Patients with lower health literacy, less adherence to medications, and more financial difficulties reported higher PETS scores (Ps < 0.01). CONCLUSION: A comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden can help to better characterize the impact of treatment and self-management burden on patient well-being and guide care toward minimally disruptive medicine.