Patient Engagement in and Adaptations to Delivery of Outpatient Care for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated adaptations to outpatient care delivery and changes in treatment demand and engagement among patients receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in the months after the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency in 2020. METHODS: Data were collected through an online survey (June-November 2020) of outpatient MOUD prescribers. The survey obtained information on outpatient practices' adaptations to MOUD treatment and urine drug screening (UDS) and elicited provider views on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient demand for, and engagement in, treatment. Multivariable regression analyses were used to examine associations among practice characteristics, patient engagement, and service adaptations. RESULTS: Of 516 respondents, 74% reported adaptations to MOUD delivery during the pandemic. Most respondents implemented virtual visits for initial (67%) and follow-up (77%) contacts. Prescribers of buprenorphine were more likely than those who did not prescribe the medication to report MOUD adaptations. Among respondents reporting any MOUD adaptation, 77% made adaptations to their UDS practices. Among 513 respondents who answered COVID-19-related questions, 89% reported that the pandemic had affected the treatment and engagement of their patients. Of these respondents, 30% reported increased difficulty with patient engagement, and 45% reported that their patients preferred virtual visits during this period, whereas 18% endorsed patient preference for in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth and federal regulatory easements in response to the COVID-19 pandemic enabled providers to continue treating patients for opioid use disorder in 2020. The results suggest that care adaptations and changes in patient demand and engagement were common in the practices surveyed.

Development and Validation of a Simplified Probability Assessment Score Integrated With Age-Adjusted d-Dimer for Diagnosis of Acute Aortic Syndromes.

Background When acute aortic syndromes (AASs) are suspected, pretest clinical probability assessment and d-dimer (DD) testing are diagnostic options allowing standardized care. Guidelines suggest use of a 12-item/3-category score (aortic dissection detection) and a DD cutoff of 500 ng/mL. However, a simplified assessment tool and a more specific DD cutoff could be advantageous. Methods and Results In a prospective derivation cohort (n=1848), 6 items identified by logistic regression (thoracic aortic aneurysm, severe pain, sudden pain, pulse deficit, neurologic deficit, hypotension), composed a simplified score (AORTAs) assigning 2 points to hypotension and 1 to the other items. AORTAs≤1 and ≥2 defined low and high clinical probability, respectively. Age-adjusted DD was calculated as years/age × 10 ng/mL (minimum 500). The AORTAs score and AORTAs≤1/age-adjusted DD rule were validated in 2 patient cohorts: a high-prevalence retrospective cohort (n=1035; 22% AASs) and a low-prevalence prospective cohort (n=447; 11% AASs) subjected to 30-day follow-up. The AUC of the AORTAs score was 0.729 versus 0.697 of the aortic dissection detection score (P=0.005). AORTAs score assessment reclassified 16.6% to 25.1% of patients, with significant net reclassification improvement of 10.3% to 32.7% for AASs and -8.6 to -17% for alternative diagnoses. In both cohorts, AORTAs≥2 had superior sensitivity and slightly lower specificity than aortic dissection detection ≥2. In the prospective validation cohort, AORTAs≤1/age-adjusted DD had a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 48.6%, and an efficiency of 43.3%. Conclusions AORTAs is a simplified score with increased sensitivity, improved AAS classification, and minor trade-off in specificity, amenable to integration with age-adjusted DD for diagnostic rule-out.

Fetal surgery for spina bifida in Zurich: results from 150 cases.

PURPOSE: Over the past 10 years, over 150 fetal spina bifida surgeries were performed at the Zurich Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. This study looks at surrogates for success and failure of this approach. METHODS: We focused on key outcome parameters including hydrocephalus shunt rate at one year, bladder control at 4, independent ambulation at 3 years, and maternal, fetal, and neonatal complications. RESULTS: From the first 150 patients undergoing fetal surgery for spina bifida, 148 (98.7%) were included in the study. Maternal-fetal surgery was uneventful in 143/148 (97%) cases. Intraoperative problems included resuscitation in 4/148 fetuses (2.7%). 1/148 fetuses (0.7%) died on postoperative day 4. Maternal complications included chorioamniotic membrane separation in 22/148 (15%), lung embolism in 3/148 (2.1%), chorioamnionitis in 2/148 (1.4%), AV-block III and uterine rupture in 1/148 each (0.7%). 1/148 (0.7%) newborn death was recorded. Hindbrain herniation was identified preoperatively in 132/148 (90%) fetuses and resolved completely in 119/132 (90%). At one year, 39/106 (37%) children had required a CSF diversion. At 4 years, 4/34 patients (12%) had normal bladder control. At 3 years, 48/57 (84%) walked independently. CONCLUSION: A majority of patients benefitted from prenatal intervention, in that the shunt rate was lower and the rates of continent and walking patients were higher than reported with postnatal care.

Benchmarking against the MOMS Trial: Zurich Results of Open Fetal Surgery for Spina Bifida.

INTRODUCTION: The Management of Myelomeningocele Study, a.k.a. the MOMS trial, was published in 2011 in the New England Journal of Medicine. This prospective randomized controlled trial proved to be a milestone publication that provided definitive evidence that fetal surgery is a novel standard of care for select fetuses with spina bifida aperta (SB). The goal of our study is to assess whether our center can match these benchmark results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study was conducted according to the MOMS protocol using the same inclusion and exclusion criteria and looked at the same outcome parameters that were used in the MOMS trial. Zurich and MOMS results were compared. RESULTS: We enrolled 20 patients between December 2010 and May 2015 all of whom underwent fetal surgery for SB. Among 51 different outcome variables, there were only 3 favorable (multiplicity-adjusted) significant differences (gestational age at birth, hindbrain herniation, and psychomotor development). There were no statistically significant differences regarding any other parameters. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm that rigorous apprenticeship, training, and comprehensive prospective data collection enable centers like the Zurich Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy to achieve benchmark results for open fetal surgery for myelomeningocele and myeloschisis. These results justify the existence and continuation of our program. Outcome documentation is an essential element of quality management. It is medically and ethically fundamental for fetal medicine and surgery centers offering high-end innovative medical care.

Open Spina Bifida: Why Not Fetal Surgery?

OBJECTIVE: The majority of patients counseled for prenatal open spina bifida repair (SBR) do not undergo fetal surgery. The aim of this study was to analyze the reasons for this phenomenon. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of the first 160 patients seeking counseling or referred to the Zurich Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy for prenatal SBR between December 2010 and March 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 104 (65%) patients did not undergo prenatal SBR. Of this subgroup, 52% met the exclusion criteria, 35% decided to terminate pregnancy, 4% chose to continue pregnancy without fetal intervention, and 3% sought care in other European centers. In 6%, data about the ensuing course of pregnancy were not recorded. The main exclusion criteria were delayed presentation (30%), absence of hindbrain herniation (28%), and concomitant spinal anomalies (17%). CONCLUSION: The high percentage of patients not qualifying for prenatal SBR underscores the necessity of a standard evaluation of every single patient at a qualified referral center. To allow a higher proportion of women carrying a fetus with open spina bifida to be timely and correctly informed about a potential fetal intervention, much more effort is mandatory to spawn correct, objective, and understandable information among all groups of people potentially exposed to this topic.

Clinical picture of meningitis in the adult patient and its relationship with age.

To analyze the clinical characteristics of acute meningitis and their relationship with age in adult patients presenting to the emergency department. We retrospectively investigated consecutive adult patients admitted with a diagnosis of bacterial or viral meningitis from 2002 to 2006. Data about patient's history, symptoms and signs at presentation, etiology and clinical course were collected. To investigate the relationship of clinical presentation with age, we divided patients in four age quartiles (<30 years, between 30 and 36 years, between 37 and 56 years, >56 years). Among the 202 patients considered in the study (mean age 42.8 ± 18.7 years, range 14-90), 162 (80.2%) patients had viral and 40 (19.8%) bacterial meningitis. Specific signs, such as neck stiffness or Kernig or Brudzinski signs, were more common in the first than in the fourth quartile (73.1 vs. 45.7% P = 0.041). Conversely, altered consciousness expressed as Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <15 was more frequent in the fourth (80.4%) than in the first (9.6%) quartile (P < 0.001). The linear regression analysis confirmed a significant decrease of GCS with the increasing of patient's age (r = -0.69, P < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, aging was associated with altered level of consciousness (OR 16.7, P < 0.001) independent of viral or bacterial etiology of the presence of comorbidities and of clinical severity (presence of severe sepsis or septic shock). Meningitis presentation largely differs with aging in adult patients. Level of consciousness is frequently altered in the older patients, when other specific signs become more rare, independent of etiology, comorbidities and clinical severity.