Pediatric sport and nonsport concussions presenting to emergency departments: injury circumstances, characteristics, and clinical management.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare injury circumstances, characteristics, and clinical management of emergency department (ED) presentations for sports-related concussion (SRC) and non-SRC. METHODS: This multicenter prospective observational study identified patients 5-17 years old who presented to EDs within 24 hours of head injury, with one or more signs or symptoms of concussion. Participants had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13-15 and no abnormalities on CT (if performed). Data were stratified by age: young children (5-8 years), older children (9-12 years), and adolescents (13-17 years). RESULTS: Of 4709 patients meeting the concussion criteria, non-SRC accounted for 56.3% of overall concussions, including 80.9% of younger child, 51.1% of older child, and 37.0% of adolescent concussions. The most common mechanism of non-SRC was falls for all ages. The most common activity accounting for SRC was bike riding for younger children, and rugby for older children and adolescents. Concussions occurring in sports areas, home, and educational settings accounted for 26.2%, 21.8%, and 19.0% of overall concussions. Concussions occurring in a sports area increased with age, while occurrences in home and educational settings decreased with age. The presence of amnesia significantly differed for SRC and non-SRC for all age groups, while vomiting and disorientation differed for older children and adolescents. Adolescents with non-SRC were admitted to a ward and underwent CT at higher proportions than those with SRC. CONCLUSIONS: Non-SRC more commonly presented to EDs overall, with SRC more common with increasing age. These data provide important information to inform public health policies, guidelines, and prevention efforts.

Testing an Intervention to Improve Health Care Worker Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Stress First Aid is an evidence-informed peer-to-peer support intervention to mitigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of health care workers (HCWs). Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored peer-to-peer support intervention compared with usual care to support HCWs' well-being at hospitals and federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial comprised 3 cohorts of HCWs who were enrolled from March 2021 through July 2022 at 28 hospitals and FQHCs in the US. Participating sites were matched as pairs by type, size, and COVID-19 burden and then randomized to the intervention arm or usual care arm (any programs already in place to support HCW well-being). The HCWs were surveyed before and after peer-to-peer support intervention implementation. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was used to evaluate the intervention's effect on outcomes, including general psychological distress and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Intervention: The peer-to-peer support intervention was delivered to HCWs by site champions who received training and subsequently trained the HCWs at their site. Recipients of the intervention were taught to respond to their own and their peers' stress reactions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were general psychological distress and PTSD. General psychological distress was measured with the Kessler 6 instrument, and PTSD was measured with the PTSD Checklist. Results: A total of 28 hospitals and FQHCs with 2077 HCWs participated. Both preintervention and postintervention surveys were completed by 2077 HCWs, for an overall response rate of 28% (41% at FQHCs and 26% at hospitals). A total of 862 individuals (696 females [80.7%]) were from sites that were randomly assigned to the intervention arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.86 (5.70) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.11 (16.07). A total of 1215 individuals (947 females [78.2%]) were from sites assigned to the usual care arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.98 (5.62) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.40 (16.43). Adherence to the intervention was 70% for FQHCs and 32% for hospitals. The ITT analyses revealed no overall treatment effect for psychological distress score (0.238 [95% CI, -0.310 to 0.785] points) or PTSD symptom score (0.189 [95% CI, -1.068 to 1.446] points). Post hoc analyses examined the heterogeneity of treatment effect by age group with consistent age effects observed across primary outcomes (psychological distress and PTSD). Among HCWs in FQHCs, there were significant and clinically meaningful treatment effects for HCWs 30 years or younger: a more than 4-point reduction for psychological distress (-4.552 [95% CI, -8.067 to -1.037]) and a nearly 7-point reduction for PTSD symptom scores (-6.771 [95% CI, -13.224 to -0.318]). Conclusions and Relevance: This trial found that this peer-to-peer support intervention did not improve well-being outcomes for HCWs overall but had a protective effect against general psychological distress and PTSD in HCWs aged 30 years or younger in FQHCs, which had higher intervention adherence. Incorporating this peer-to-peer support intervention into medical training, with ongoing support over time, may yield beneficial results in both standard care and during public health crises. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04723576.

A scoping review of transcription-less practices for analysis of aphasic discourse and implications for future research.

BACKGROUND: It is important to capture a comprehensive language profile from speakers with aphasia. One way to do this is to evaluate spoken discourse, which is language beyond a single simple clause used for a specific purpose. While the historical trend in aphasiology has been to capture performance during isolated language tasks, such as confrontation naming, there is a demonstrated need and benefit to collecting language information from tasks that resemble everyday communication. As a result, there has been an increase in discourse analysis research over time. However, despite clinicians' and researchers' desire to analyse spoken discourse, they are faced with critical barriers that inhibit implementation. AIMS: To use scoping review methodology to identify transcription-less tools developed to analyse discourse from individuals with aphasia. The review addressed the following question: 'What transcription-less tools and analysis procedures are available to assess discourse in people with aphasia?' and included several sub-questions to further characterise the type of discourse and tool being used, participants on whom the tool was used to rate discourse abilities, tool users (raters), and psychometric properties. METHODS: The scoping review was conducted between the months of October 2022 and January 2023, concluding 30 January 2023, on PubMed/NCBI, Academic Search Complete and Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts. Major inclusion parameters included peer-reviewed papers written in English; that the tool was used to analyse discourse elicited by individuals with acquired aphasia; and that the tool was not a part of a standardised battery or assessment. Perceptual discourse analysis was defined as any analysis which primarily relied on listener impressions and did not numerically quantify specific language behaviours. 'Transcription-less' analysis was defined as any discourse analysis which did not require a written record of the discourse sample in order to be completed. A total of 396 abstracts were screened and 39 full articles were reviewed, yielding 21 papers that were included in the review. MAIN CONTRIBUTION: An overview of the state of transcription-less tools for aphasic discourse analysis is provided, and next steps are identified to facilitate increased implementation of discourse analysis in clinical and research settings. CONCLUSION: Transcription-less tools have many benefits for analysing multiple levels (e.g., linguistic, propositional, macrostructural, pragmatic) of discourse, but require more research to establish sound psychometric properties and to explore the implementation of these tools in clinical settings. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Individuals with aphasia prioritise treatment outcomes at the discourse level such as being able to engage in conversations with friends and family about important topics and participating in social and leisure activities. However, discourse is rarely used as a treatment outcome measure in clinical practice due to multiple barriers. When speech-language pathologists do assess discourse, they often make perceptual judgements without transcribing the discourse sample. Transcription-less analysis procedures may improve clinical implementation of discourse assessment, which would better match treatment outcome measurement to clients' desired outcomes. However, little is known about the current state of transcription-less discourse analysis, blocking progress. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study provides an overview of currently available transcription-less discourse analysis procedures that are not part of published standardised aphasia assessments. Transcription-less measures are available to evaluate discourse at all levels (i.e., lexical, propositional, macro-structural/planning, and pragmatic) and most measures include items that assess discourse abilities across multiple levels. Additionally, there are transcription-less measures available for both structured (e.g., picture scene description) and spontaneous (e.g., conversation) discourse tasks. However, current transcription-less procedures are lacking psychometric data including information about validity and reliability. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Transcription-less analysis methods may provide an avenue for increased implementation of discourse measurement into clinical practice. Further research is needed to determine the clinical utility of transcription-less discourse analysis to better monitor clients' desired treatment outcomes.

Effect of a single one-hour teaching session about environmental pollutants and climate change on the understanding and behavioral choices of adolescents: The BREATHE pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the wealth of scientific information on the health effects of air pollution, the adult public's lifestyle continues to be largely detrimental towards the environment. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to determine whether a short interactive teaching session on air pollution could shift reported behavioral choices of adolescents towards environmentally friendlier options. METHODS: We performed a pilot randomized control trial in which eighth-grade students were randomized to receive a one-hour script-based teaching on either the effects of air pollution on lung health (intervention group) or the role of vaccination in public health (active control group). The enrolled students completed a survey (15 multiple-choice questions; five targeting understanding (score range 5 to 20); ten targeting behavioral choices (score range 10 to 38) newly designed for this study to evaluate their understanding and predict their future behavior towards air pollution immediately before, immediately after, and one month after the teaching sessions. RESULTS: Seventy-seven students (age = 13.5±0.6 years; 50.4% female; median annual family income = $25K-$50K with 70.1% <$50K; 39 assigned to intervention group) were enrolled in the study. The teaching sessions did not result in any significant change in the participants' understanding domain scores in either the intervention or the control groups. However, the intervention (air pollution) teaching session resulted in a statistically significant increase in behavior domain score from baseline to immediately post-teaching, which continued to be present at one-month follow-up (mean ± standard deviation of score change immediately after = 1.7±3.3; score change 1-month after = 2.5±3.2; P<0.001; minimally important difference = 1.0). DISCUSSION: This pilot study highlights the potential of a short one-time teaching session in promoting environmentally friendly behavior choices among adolescents.

Incidence of traumatic brain injuries in head-injured children with seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Incidence and short-term outcomes of clinically important traumatic brain injury (ciTBI) in head-injured children presenting to ED with post-traumatic seizure (PTS) is not described in current literature. METHODS: Planned secondary analysis of a prospective observational study undertaken in 10 Australasian Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT) network EDs between 2011 and 2014 of head-injured children <18 years with and without PTS. Clinical predictors and outcomes were analysed by attributable risk (AR), risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), including the association with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores. RESULTS: Of 20 137 head injuries, 336 (1.7%) had PTS with median age of 4.8 years. Initial GCS was 15 in 268/336 (79.8%, AR -16.1 [95% CI -20.4 to -11.8]), 14 in 24/336 (7.1%, AR 4.4 [95% CI 1.6-7.2]) and ≤13 in 44/336 (13.1%, AR 11.7 [95% CI 8.1-15.3]) in comparison with those without PTS, respectively. The ciTBI rate was 34 (10.1%) with PTS versus 219 (1.1%) without PTS (AR 9.0 [95% CI 5.8-12.2]) with 5/268 (1.9%), 6/24 (25.0%) and 23/44 (52.3%) with GCS 15, 14 and ≤13, respectively. In PTS, rates of admission ≥2 nights (34 [10.1%] AR 9.0 [95% CI 5.8-12.3]), intubation >24 h (9 [2.7%] AR 2.5 [95% CI 0.8-4.2]) and neurosurgery (8 [2.4%] AR 2.0 [95% CI 0.4-3.7]), were higher than those without PTS. Children with PTS and GCS 15 or 14 had no neurosurgery, intubations or death, with two deaths in children with PTS and GCS ≤13. CONCLUSIONS: PTS was uncommon in head-injured children presenting to the ED but associated with an increased risk of ciTBI in those with reduced GCS on arrival.

Validation of an Automated Procedure for Calculating Core Lexicon From Transcripts.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to advance the use of structured, monologic discourse analysis by validating an automated scoring procedure for core lexicon (CoreLex) using transcripts. METHOD: Forty-nine transcripts from persons with aphasia and 48 transcripts from persons with no brain injury were retrieved from the AphasiaBank database. Five structured monologic discourse tasks were scored manually by trained scorers and via automation using a newly developed CLAN command based upon previously published lists for CoreLex. Point-to-point (or word-by-word) accuracy and reliability of the two methods were calculated. Scoring discrepancies were examined to identify errors. Time estimates for each method were calculated to determine if automated scoring improved efficiency. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients for the tasks ranged from .998 to .978, indicating excellent intermethod reliability. Automated scoring using CLAN represented a significant time savings for an experienced CLAN user and for inexperienced CLAN users following step-by-step instructions. CONCLUSIONS: Automated scoring of CoreLex is a valid and reliable alternative to the current gold standard of manually scoring CoreLex from transcribed monologic discourse samples. The downstream time saving of this automated analysis may allow for more efficient and broader utilization of this discourse measure in aphasia research. To further encourage the use of this method, go to https://aphasia.talkbank.org/discourse/CoreLexicon/ for materials and the step-by-step instructions utilized in this project. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.20399304.

MACRA Palliative Care Quality Measure Development-Testing Summary Report: Measure Name: Receiving Desired Help for Pain.

Palliative care has expanded rapidly in the past 20 years, especially in the ambulatory (office) setting, and there is growing consensus regarding the need to systematically measure and incentivize high-quality care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services entered a cooperative agreement with the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 to develop two patient-reported measures of ambulatory palliative care experience: Feeling Heard and Understood and Receiving Desired Help for Pain. Under contract to AAHPM, RAND Health Care researchers developed and tested both measures over a three-year project period. Researcher efforts included identifying, developing, testing, and validating appropriate patient-reported data elements for each measure; developing and fielding a survey instrument to collect necessary data in a national beta field test with 44 ambulatory palliative care programs; and collecting and analyzing data about measure reliability and validity to establish measure performance and final specifications. Further, the authors elicited provider and program perspectives on the use and value of the performance measures and their implementation and elicited the perspectives of patients from racial and ethnic minorities to understand their experience of ambulatory palliative care and optimal approaches to measurement. In this study, the authors present results from their test of the Receiving Desired Help for Pain performance measure, which they demonstrate to be a reliable and valid measure that is ready for use in quality improvement and quality payment programs.

MACRA Palliative Care Quality Measure Development-Testing Summary Report: Measure Name: Feeling Heard and Understood.

Palliative care has expanded rapidly in the past 20 years, especially in the ambulatory (office) setting, and there is growing consensus regarding the need to systematically measure and incentivize high-quality care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services entered a cooperative agreement with the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 to develop two patient-reported measures of ambulatory palliative care experience: Feeling Heard and Understood and Receiving Desired Help for Pain. Under contract to AAHPM, RAND Health Care researchers developed and tested both measures over a three-year project period. Researcher efforts included identifying, developing, testing, and validating appropriate patient-reported data elements for each measure; developing and fielding a survey instrument to collect necessary data in a national beta field test with 44 ambulatory palliative care programs; and collecting and analyzing data about measure reliability and validity to establish measure performance and final specifications. Further, the authors elicited provider and program perspectives on the use and value of the performance measures and their implementation and elicited the perspectives of patients from racial and ethnic minorities to understand their experience of ambulatory palliative care and optimal approaches to measurement. In this study, the authors present results from their test of the Feeling Heard and Understood performance measure, which they demonstrate to be a reliable and valid measure that is ready for use in quality improvement and quality payment programs.

Protecting the mental and physical well-being of frontline health care workers during COVID-19: Study protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed health care workers at unprecedented risk of stress, burnout, and moral injury. This paper describes the design of an ongoing cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of Stress First Aid (SFA) to Usual Care (UC) in protecting the well-being of frontline health care workers. METHODS: We plan to recruit a diverse set of hospitals and health centers (eight matched pairs of hospitals and six pairs of centers), with a goal of approximately 50 HCW per health center and 170 per hospital. Participating sites in each pair are randomly assigned to SFA or UC (i.e., whatever psychosocial support is currently being received by HCW). Each site identified a leader to provide organizational support of the study; SFA sites also identified at least one champion to be trained in the intervention. Using a "train the trainer" model, champions in turn trained their peers in selected HCW teams or units to implement SFA over an eight-week period. We surveyed HCW before and after the implementation period. The primary outcomes are posttraumatic stress disorder and general psychological distress; secondary outcomes include depression and anxiety symptoms, sleep problems, social functioning problems, burnout, moral distress, and resilience. In addition, through in-depth qualitative interviews with leaders, champions, and HCW, we assessed the implementation of SFA, including acceptability, feasibility, and uptake. DISCUSSION: Results from this study will provide initial evidence for the application of SFA to support HCW well-being during a pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (Clinicaltrials.govNCT04723576).

Standardized assessment of medication reconciliation in post-acute care.

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation (MR) facilitates safety during transitions of care, which occur frequently across post-acute care (PAC) settings. Under the intent of the IMPACT Act of 2014, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services contracted with the RAND Corporation to develop and test standardized assessment data elements (SADEs) that assess the MR process. METHODS: We employed an iterative process that incorporated stakeholder input and three rounds of testing to identify, refine, and evaluate MR SADEs. Testing took place in 186 PAC sites (57 home health agencies, 28 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, 28 long-term care hospitals, and 73 skilled nursing facilities). There were 2951 patients in the final test. Novel MR SADEs, based on the Joint Commission's framework, were refined. The final SADEs assessed whether: patient was taking high-risk medications; an indication was noted for each medication class; discrepancies were identified; patient or family/caregiver was involved in addressing discrepancies; discrepancies were communicated to physician (or designee) within 24 h; recommended physician actions regarding discrepancies were implemented within 24 h after physician response; and the reconciled list was communicated to patient, prescriber, and/or pharmacy. Two assessors per facility collected data for each patient. Analyses described completion time, data missingness, and interrater reliability, as well as feedback on assessor burden. RESULTS: Time to complete the MR SADEs was 3.2 min. Missing data were <5%. Interrater reliability was moderate to high (κ: 0.42 [whether a reconciled list was communicated to prescribers] to 0.89 [identifying patients taking hypoglycemics]). For identifying high-risk medication classes, interrater reliability was high (κ: 0.72-0.89). There were minimal differences by setting. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first set of MR SADEs that have been assessed across the PAC settings. Results demonstrate feasibility, based on missing data and completion time, and moderate to strong reliability, based on interrater comparisons, of assessing MR.

Who receives post-acute care? Characteristics of national population and field test sample.

BACKGROUND: Each year millions of Medicare beneficiaries in the United States receive post-acute care (PAC) in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), and home health agencies (HHA). We describe, overall and by PAC setting, the national population of facilities and patients, evaluate the representativeness of a national field test sample, and describe patient characteristics in the national field test sample. METHODS: We analyzed the 2016 Provider of Service file, 2016 patient assessment data reported by PAC providers to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid, and data collected from PAC providers participating in a national field test. National data included 27,234 PAC settings and 5,033,820 beneficiaries receiving PAC. The national field test sample consisted of 143 facilities across 14 markets with 25-30 patients sampled from each facility (n = 3669). We describe PAC facility and patient characteristics for both the national and field test sample. RESULTS: Nationally, PAC facilities were more likely for-profit versus not for-profit, have an average nurse-to-bed ratio between 1:10 to 1:1 (lowest in SNFs) and be in metropolitan versus other areas. PAC patients were more likely to be white, female, and 75-89 years of age; heart failure as a primary medical condition tended to be more common than stroke or sepsis. There was limited variability across setting types. In the national field test, patients in LTCHs demonstrated a greater likelihood of cognitive impairment, positive depression screening, bowel and bladder appliance use, higher rates of medication drug classes taken, and use of therapeutic diets and IV medications. CONCLUSION: The national field test facility and patient samples were fairly representative of the national population overall and across settings with a few exceptions. Moreover, differences according to PAC setting on patient characteristics in the national field test aligned with general differences in patient populations.

Development and testing of a standardized pain interview assessment for use in post-acute care.

OBJECTIVES: Pain is highly prevalent among patients in post-acute care (PAC) settings and can affect quality of life, treatment outcomes, and transitions in care. Routine, accurate assessment of pain across settings is important for pain management and care planning; however, existing PAC assessment instruments do not assess patient pain in a standardized manner. METHODS: We developed and tested a set of pain interview data elements for use across PAC settings (skilled nursing facilities, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, long term care hospitals, home health agencies) as part of a larger effort undertaken by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to develop standardized assessment data elements to meet the requirements of the IMPACT Act of 2014. The interview assessed six pain constructs: presence; frequency; interference with sleep; interference with rehabilitation therapies [if applicable]; interference with daily activities; worst pain; and pain relief from treatments/medications). A total of 3031 PAC patients at 143 PAC settings (across 14 U.S. geographic/metropolitan areas in 10 states) participated in a national field test of standardized data elements from November 2017 to August 2018. We assessed item response distributions, time to complete interviews, inter-assessor agreement, and, for a subset of patients, change in responses between admission and discharge assessments. We also conducted focus groups with nurse assessors about their experiences administering the items. RESULTS: For patients reporting any pain, average time to complete the pain interview was 3.1 min (SD = 1.3), and interrater reliability was excellent for all data elements (kappa range: 0.95-0.99). Findings were similar across types of PAC settings. Qualitative data from nurses emphasized ease of administration and high perceived clinical utility. CONCLUSION: Findings provide support for feasibility of implementing a standardized pain interview assessment in PAC settings. This tool can support tracking of patient needs across settings and interoperability of data in electronic medical records.

Standardized assessment of cognitive function of post-acute care patients.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of cognitive function in post-acute care (PAC) settings is important for understanding an individual's condition and care needs, developing better person-directed care plans, predicting resource needs and understanding case mix. Therefore, we tested the feasibility and reliability of cognitive function assessments, including the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), Confusion Assessment Method (CAM©), Expression and Understanding, and Behavioral Signs and Symptoms for patients in PAC under the intent of the IMPACT Act of 2014. METHODS: We conducted a national test of assessments of four standardized cognitive function data elements among patients in PAC. One hundred and forty-three PAC settings (57 home health agencies, 28 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, 28 long-term care hospitals, and 73 Skilled Nursing Facilities) across 14 U.S. markets from November 2017 to August 2018. At least one of four cognitive function data elements were assessed in 3026 patients. We assessed descriptive statistics, percent of missing data, time to complete, and interrater reliability between paired research nurse and facility staff assessors, and assessor feedback. RESULTS: The BIMS, CAM©, Expression and Understanding, and Behavioral Signs and Symptoms demonstrated low rates of missing data (less than 2%), high percent agreement, and substantial support from assessors. The prevalence of Behavioral Signs and Symptoms was low in our sample of PAC settings. CONCLUSION: Findings provide support for feasibility of implementing standardized assessment of all our cognitive function data elements for patients in PAC settings. The BIMS and CAM© were adopted into federal Quality Reporting Programs in the fiscal year/calendar year 2020 final rules. Future work could consider implementing additional cognitive items that assess areas not covered by the BIMS and CAM©.

Standardized assessment of cognitive function, mood, and pain among patients who are unable to communicate.

BACKGROUND: Assessments of patients have sought to increase the patient voice through direct patient interviews and performance-based testing. However, some patients in post-acute care (PAC) are unable to communicate and cannot participate in interviews or structured cognitive tests. Therefore, we tested the feasibility and reliability of observational assessments of cognitive function, mood, and pain for patients who are unable to communicate in PAC settings. METHODS: We conducted a national test of observational assessments of cognitive function, mood, and pain in 143 PAC facilities (57 home health agencies, 28 Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities, 28 Long-Term Care Hospitals, and 73 Skilled Nursing Facilities) across 14 U.S. markets from November 2017 to August 2018. For the 548 patients identified as unable to make themselves understood, we assessed descriptive statistics, percent of missing data, time to complete, and inter-rater reliability (IRR) between paired research nurse and facility staff assessors. RESULTS: Most sampled non-communicative patients were administered all three observational assessments. Among assessed patients, overall missing data was high for some items within the Staff Assessment for Mental Status (2.9% to 33.5%) and Staff Assessment of Patient Mood (12.4% to 44.3%), but not the Observational Assessment of Pain or Distress (0.0% to 4.4%). Average time to complete the data elements ranged from 2.4 to 3.5 min and IRR was good to excellent for all items (kappa range: 0.74-0.98). CONCLUSION: The three observational data elements had acceptable reliability. Although results revealed varying feasibility, there was support for feasibility overall in terms of implementing a standardized observational assessment of pain for patients in PAC settings. Additional work is needed for the Staff Assessment for Mental Status and the Staff Assessment of Patient Mood to improve the observable nature of these data elements and enhance instructions and training for standardizing the assessments.

Developing standardized patient assessment data elements for Medicare post-acute care assessments.

BACKGROUND: To support interoperability and care planning across provider types, the Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 (IMPACT Act) requires the submission of standardized patient assessment data using the assessment instruments provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). CMS was tasked with developing standardized assessment data elements (SADEs) within clinical categories named in the IMPACT Act. METHOD: We used environmental scans, subject matter expert, and stakeholder input to identify candidate SADEs; tested candidate data elements in alpha testing; revised SADEs and training protocols based on alpha analyses and stakeholder feedback; tested SADEs across post-acute care (PAC) settings in a national field test that included 3121 patients across 143 home health agencies, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, long-term care hospitals, and skilled nursing facilities in 14 markets across the United States; and analyzed data and stakeholder input from national testing. Field testing measured the time required for assessment, percent completion, and inter-rater reliability. We analyzed qualitative feedback from stakeholder focus groups and technical expert panels. We also obtained survey and focus group feedback from data collectors. RESULTS: We developed a mixed-method, multi-stakeholder procedure to identify and gather input on SADE for cross-setting use. This process yielded feasible and reliable SADEs for PAC settings that assess pain, cognitive status, mood, and medication reconciliation. The success of this work depended on working iteratively with diverse stakeholders and providing qualitative as well as quantitative evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The procedures applied in this project for developing and adopting SADEs for PAC, as well as the challenges and strategies to overcome challenges, should be considered in future item and quality measure development.

Standardized assessment of depression symptoms in post-acute care: A screening threshold approach.

BACKGROUND: Depression symptoms have impacts on quality of life, rehabilitation and treatment adherence, and resource utilization among patients in post-acute care (PAC) settings. The PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 are instruments for the assessment of depression, previously used in PAC settings, that have tradeoffs in terms of measurement depth versus respondent/assessor burden. Therefore, the present study tested a gateway version of the protocol (PHQ-2 to 9). METHODS: In 143 PAC settings in 14 U.S. markets across 10 states from November 2017 to August 2018, facility and research nurses administered the PHQ-2 to communicative patients (n = 3010). Nurses administered the full PHQ-9 if the patient screened positive for either of the two cardinal symptoms assessed by the PHQ-2 (depressed mood and anhedonia). We assessed the prevalence and frequency of depression symptoms using the PHQ-2 to 9, associations between depression screening results and patient characteristics and clinical conditions, and feasibility indicators. RESULTS: More than 1 in 4 patients (28%) screened positive on the PHQ-2. Only 6% of those completing the full PHQ-9 had a score indicating "minimal" severity. The average score (M = 11.9) met the threshold for moderate depression. Positive PHQ-2 screening was associated with age, female gender, disposition at discharge, septicemia/severe sepsis, and dependence for ADLs of toileting and lying to sitting mobility. Age was also associated with full PHQ-9 scores; patients ages 45-64 had the highest mean score. Length of stay was not associated with PHQ-2 screening results or full PHQ-2 to 9 scores. Missing data were minimal (<2.4%). The average time to complete was 2.3 min. Interrater reliability and percent agreement were excellent. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the feasibility of a gateway scoring approach to standardized assessment of depression symptoms among PAC patients, and that depression symptoms are relatively common among this inpatient population.

Consumer engagement in health care policy, research and services: A systematic review and meta-analysis of methods and effects.

To assess the effects of consumer engagement in health care policy, research and services. We updated a review published in 2006 and 2009 and revised the previous search strategies for key databases (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Web of Science) up to February 2020. Selection criteria included randomised controlled trials assessing consumer engagement in developing health care policy, research, or health services. The International Association for Public Participation, Spectrum of Public Participation was used to identify, describe, compare and analyse consumer engagement. Outcome measures were effects on people; effects on the policy/research/health care services; or process outcomes. We included 23 randomised controlled trials with a moderate or high risk of bias, involving 136,265 participants. Most consumer engagement strategies adopted a consultative approach during the development phase of interventions, targeted to health services. Based on four large cluster-randomised controlled trials, there is evidence that consumer engagement in the development and delivery of health services to enhance the care of pregnant women results in a reduction in neonatal, but not maternal, mortality. From other trials, there is evidence that involving consumers in developing patient information material results in material that is more relevant, readable and understandable for patients, and can improve knowledge. Mixed effects are reported of consumer-engagement on the development and/or implementation of health professional training. There is some evidence that using consumer interviewers instead of staff in satisfaction surveys can have a small influence on the results. There is some evidence that consumers may have a role in identifying a broader range of health care priorities that are complementary to those from professionals. There is some evidence that consumer engagement in monitoring and evaluating health services may impact perceptions of patient safety or quality of life. There is growing evidence from randomised controlled trials of the effects of consumer engagement on the relevance and positive outcomes of health policy, research and services. Health care consumers, providers, researchers and funders should continue to employ evidence-informed consumer engagement in their jurisdictions, with embedded evaluation. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42018102595.

Assessment of language impairment and function.

This chapter is written for the qualified neurologist or related professional working with persons who have had a stroke or other sudden brain injury. It is critical that the presence of aphasia is detected, no matter how mild the presentation, and to support that assertion, this chapter highlights the plight of persons with latent aphasia. At the individual level, the impact of aphasia is devastating, with overwhelming evidence that aphasia negatively impacts psychosocial outcomes. At the global level, sensitive detection and accurate diagnosis of aphasia are critical for accurate characterization and quantification of the global burden of aphasia. The word "LANGUAGE" is leveraged as an acronym to create a useful and memorable checklist to guide navigation of aphasia screening and assessment: it begins with the definition of language (L), followed by the definition and diagnostic criteria for aphasia (A). Then language abilities and characteristics to be considered in assessment are presented: naming (N); grammar and syntax (G); unintelligible words, jargon, and paraphasias (U); auditory comprehension and repetition (A); graphemic abilities-reading and writing (G); and everyday communication and discourse (E). Recommendations for improving procedural adherence are provided, and a list of potential brief assessment measures are introduced.