Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 142
Filter
2.
J Med Screen ; : 9691413241238960, 2024 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38504656

ABSTRACT

Though widespread adoption of cervical cancer screening (CCS) in the US has been associated with a reduction in cervical cancer incidence and mortality, screening also carries with it potential risks. Newer national guidelines recommend decreased screening frequency to optimize the benefit/risk balance and to prevent over-screening. Here, we examined the alignment of US cancer center websites' public recommendations on CCS with national guidelines. We reviewed the websites of 1024 cancer centers accredited by the US Commission on Cancer during January-August 2022. We recorded the recommended frequency and type of CCS and any screening risks mentioned, comparing against national US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) and American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines. Of 1024 US cancer centers, 60% (610) provided CCS recommendations. Most centers are in alignment with the screening starting age (96%, 544/565) and stopping age (94%, 440/470) recommended by national guidelines. Of 508 centers specifying the frequency of standalone cervical cytology, 83% (419) recommended a screening interval of three years; however, 14% (73) recommended cervical cytology more frequently than the three-year interval recommended by the ACS/USPSTF. Screening risks were mentioned by 20% (124/610) of centers. Our findings highlight the importance of education on screening benefits and risks for physicians and patients to enable shared decision making based on evidence-based guidelines.

3.
Pain Manag ; 14(2): 87-99, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38318666

ABSTRACT

Aim: We aimed to understand experiences with opioids and cannabis for post-treatment cancer survivors. Patients & methods: We conducted seven focus groups among head and neck and lung cancer survivors, using standard qualitative methodology to explore themes around 1) post-treatment pain and 2) utilization, perceived benefits and perceived harms of cannabis and opioids. Results & conclusion: Survivors (N = 25) experienced addiction fears, stigma and access challenges for both products. Opioids were often perceived as critical for severe pain. Cannabis reduced pain and anxiety for many survivors, suggesting that anxiety screening, as recommended in guidelines, would improve traditional pain assessment. Opioids and cannabis present complex harms and benefits for post-treatment survivors who must balance pain management and minimizing side effects.


Subject(s)
Cannabis , Chronic Pain , Neoplasms , Humans , Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Pain Management/methods , Chronic Pain/drug therapy , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Survivors
4.
Diagnosis (Berl) ; 11(2): 136-141, 2024 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38284830

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Perform a pilot study of online game-based learning (GBL) using natural frequencies and feedback to teach diagnostic reasoning. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized-controlled trial of computer-based training. We enrolled medical students, residents, practicing physicians and nurse practitioners. The intervention was a 45 min online GBL training vs. control education with a primary outcome of score on a scale of diagnostic accuracy (composed of 10 realistic case vignettes, requesting estimates of probability of disease after a test result, 0-100 points total). RESULTS: Of 90 participants there were 30 students, 30 residents and 30 practicing clinicians. Of these 62 % (56/90) were female and 52 % (47/90) were white. Sixty were randomized to GBL intervention and 30 to control. The primary outcome of diagnostic accuracy immediately after training was better in GBL (mean accuracy score 59.4) vs. control (37.6), p=0.0005. The GBL group was then split evenly (30, 30) into no further intervention or weekly emails with case studies. Both GBL groups performed better than control at one-month and some continued effect at three-month follow up. Scores at one-month GBL (59.2) GBL plus emails (54.2) vs. control (33.9), p=0.024; three-months GBL (56.2), GBL plus emails (42.9) vs. control (35.1), p=0.076. Most participants would recommend GBL to colleagues (73 %), believed it was enjoyable (92 %) and believed it improves test interpretation (95 %). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, a single session with GBL nearly doubled score on a scale of diagnostic accuracy in medical trainees and practicing clinicians. The impact of GBL persisted after three months.


Subject(s)
Clinical Competence , Humans , Pilot Projects , Female , Male , Adult , Students, Medical , Internship and Residency , Computer-Assisted Instruction/methods , Video Games , Learning , Nurse Practitioners/education
5.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(11): e2342215, 2023 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37934494

ABSTRACT

Importance: Overuse of surgical procedures is increasing around the world and harms both individuals and health care systems by using resources that could otherwise be allocated to addressing the underuse of effective health care interventions. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is some limited country-specific evidence showing that overuse of surgical procedures is increasing, at least for certain procedures. Objectives: To assess factors associated with, extent and consequences of, and potential solutions for low-value surgical procedures in LMICs. Evidence Review: We searched 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Index Medicus) for studies published from database inception until April 27, 2022, with no restrictions on date or language. A combination of MeSH terms and free-text words about the overuse of surgical procedures was used. Studies examining the problem of overuse of surgical procedures in LMICs were included and categorized by major focus: the extent of overuse, associated factors, consequences, and solutions. Findings: Of 4276 unique records identified, 133 studies across 63 countries were included, reporting on more than 9.1 million surgical procedures (median per study, 894 [IQR, 97-4259]) and with more than 11.4 million participants (median per study, 989 [IQR, 257-6857]). Fourteen studies (10.5%) were multinational. Of the 119 studies (89.5%) originating from single countries, 69 (58.0%) were from upper-middle-income countries and 30 (25.2%) were from East Asia and the Pacific. Of the 42 studies (31.6%) reporting extent of overuse of surgical procedures, most (36 [85.7%]) reported on unnecessary cesarean delivery, with estimated rates in LMICs ranging from 12% to 81%. Evidence on other surgical procedures was limited and included abdominal and percutaneous cardiovascular surgical procedures. Consequences of low-value surgical procedures included harms and costs, such as an estimated US $3.29 billion annual cost of unnecessary cesarean deliveries in China. Associated factors included private financing, and solutions included social media campaigns and multifaceted interventions such as audits, feedback, and reminders. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found growing evidence of overuse of surgical procedures in LMICs, which may generate significant harm and waste of limited resources; the majority of studies reporting overuse were about unnecessary cesarean delivery. Therefore, a better understanding of the problems in other surgical procedures and a robust evaluation of solutions are needed.


Subject(s)
Cesarean Section , Developing Countries , Female , Pregnancy , Humans , Asia, Eastern , China , Databases, Factual
6.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(9): ofad455, 2023 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37720701

ABSTRACT

Greater understanding of clinical decision thresholds may improve inappropriate testing and treatment of urinary tract infection (UTI). We used a survey of clinicians to examine UTI decision thresholds. Although overestimates of UTI occurred, testing and treatment thresholds were generally rational, were lower than previously reported, and differed by type of clinician.

7.
Support Care Cancer ; 31(9): 545, 2023 Aug 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37650961

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To characterize cannabis use among cancer patients, we aimed to describe 1) patterns of cannabis use across multiple cancer sites; 2) perceived goals, benefits, harms of cannabis; and 3) communication about cannabis. METHODS: Patients with 9 different cancers treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between March and August 2021 completed an online or phone survey eliciting cannabis use, attitudes, and communication about cannabis. Multivariable logistic regression estimated the association of cancer type and cannabis use, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and prior cannabis use. RESULTS: Among 1258 respondents, 31% used cannabis after diagnosis, ranging from 25% for lung cancer to 59% for testicular cancer. Characteristics associated with cannabis use included younger age, lower education level, and cancer type. In multivariable analysis, compared to lung cancer patients, gastrointestinal cancer patients were more likely to use cannabis (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-5.43). Cannabis use in the year prior to diagnosis was strongly associated with cannabis use after diagnosis (OR 19.13, 95% CI 11.92-30.72). Among users, reasons for use included difficulty sleeping (48%); stress, anxiety, or depression (46%); and pain (42%). Among respondents who used cannabis to improve symptoms, 70-90% reported improvement; < 5% reported that any symptom worsened. Only 25% discussed cannabis with healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Almost a third of cancer patients use cannabis, largely for symptom management. Oncologists may not know about their patients' cannabis use. To improve decision making about cannabis use during cancer care, research is needed to determine benefits and harms of cannabis use.


Subject(s)
Cannabis , Lung Neoplasms , Testicular Neoplasms , Humans , Male , Anxiety , Anxiety Disorders
8.
Integr Cancer Ther ; 22: 15347354231162080, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37014010

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbances are common and bothersome among cancer and noncancer populations. Suanzaoren (Ziziphi Spinosae Semen) is commonly used to improve sleep, yet its efficacy and safety are unclear. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from inception through October 5, 2021, to identify randomized trials of Suanzaoren. We included randomized trials comparing Suanzaoren to placebo, medications, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), or usual care for improving sleep outcomes in cancer and noncancer patients with insomnia or sleep disturbance. We performed a risk of bias analysis following Cochrane guidelines. Depending on heterogeneity, we pooled studies with similar comparators using fixed- and random-effects models. RESULTS: We included participants with insomnia disorder (N = 785) or sleep disturbance (N = 120) from 9 trials. Compared with placebo, Suanzaoren led to significant subjective sleep quality improvements in participants with insomnia and patients with sleep disturbance combined (standard mean difference -0.58, 95% CI -1.04, -0.11; P < .01); Compared with benzodiazepines or CBT, Suanzaoren was associated with a significant decrease in insomnia severity (mean difference -2.68 points, 95% CI -5.50, -0.22; P = .03) at 4 weeks in the general population and cancer patients. The long-term effects of Suanzaoren were mixed among trials. Suanzaoren did not increase the incidence of major adverse events. The placebo-controlled studies had a low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Suanzaoren is associated with short-term patient-reported sleep quality improvements among individuals with insomnia or sleep disturbance. Due to the small sample size and variable study quality, the clinical benefits and harms of Suanzaoren, particularly in the long term, should be further assessed in a sufficiently powered randomized trial. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021281943.


Subject(s)
Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Plants, Medicinal , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders , Sleep Wake Disorders , Humans , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders/drug therapy , Quality Improvement , Seeds , Sleep , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use , Sleep Wake Disorders/drug therapy , Sleep Wake Disorders/etiology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
9.
J Integr Complement Med ; 29(8): 468-482, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36730693

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Ginseng has been widely used in fatigue management. However, its efficacy on fatigue remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ginseng and ginseng herbal formulas for fatigue in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods: The authors searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) databases from inception to July 6, 2022. Outcomes included fatigue severity, quality of life (QoL), and adverse events (AEs). Quality of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. They pooled all included data and performed subgroup analysis by fatigue type, assessment instrument, and ginseng type. Results: The authors included 19 RCTs. Pooled analyses found no significant reduction in fatigue severity with ginseng versus controls (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.82 to 0.11, p = 0.13). In subgroup analysis, there was significant fatigue reduction with the ginseng herbal formula (SMD: -0.39, 95% CI: -0.66 to -0.13, p = 0.004) and chronic fatigue (CF) (SMD: -0.30, 95% CI: -0.56 to -0.03, p = 0.03) compared to controls. Ginseng produced significant reductions in general (i.e., non-disease-specific) fatigue compared to controls (SMD: -0.48, 95% CI: -0.71 to -0.25, p < 0.0001). Ginseng was associated with a trend toward QoL improvement (p = 0.05) and did not increase AEs compared with controls. Effect sizes were small. Conclusion: Ginseng herbal formulas improved fatigue severity compared to controls, especially among patients with CF, but with a small effect size. Rigorous RCTs as well as guidelines for standard ginseng usage are needed to further evaluate the effects of ginseng for fatigue and ensure proper use.


Subject(s)
Complementary Therapies , Panax , Humans , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
10.
J Gen Intern Med ; 38(6): 1541-1546, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36829048

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Educating medical trainees to practice high value care is a critical component to improving quality of care and should be introduced at the beginning of medical education. AIM: To create a successful educational model that provides medical students and junior faculty with experiential learning in quality improvement and mentorship opportunities, and produce effective quality initiatives. SETTING: A tertiary medical center affiliated with a medical school in New York City. PARTICIPANTS: First year medical students, junior faculty in hospital medicine, and a senior faculty course director. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Student High Value Care initiative is a longitudinal initiative comprised of six core elements: (1) project development, (2) value improvement curriculum, (3) mentorship, (4), Institutional support, (5) scholarship, and (6) student leadership. PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the first 3 years, 68 medical students and ten junior faculty participated in 10 quality improvement projects. Nine projects were successful in their measured outcomes, with statistically significant improvements. Nine had an abstract accepted to a regional or national meeting, and seven produced publications in peer-reviewed literature. DISCUSSION: In the first 3 years of the initiative, we successfully engaged medical students and junior faculty to create and support the implementation of successful quality improvement initiatives. Since that time, the program continues to offer meaningful mentorship and scholarship opportunities.


Subject(s)
Education, Medical , Students, Medical , Humans , Fellowships and Scholarships , Curriculum , Faculty
11.
Clin Chem Lab Med ; 61(2): 339-348, 2023 01 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36367353

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Many biomarkers have been studied to assist in the risk stratification and prognostication of patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Procalcitonin (PCT), a circulating precursor of the hormone calcitonin, has been studied with mixed results as a predictor of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the general population; however, to date, no studies have focused on the utility of PCT in predicting disease severity and death from COVID-19 in the cancer population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of cancer patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a comprehensive cancer center over a 10-month period who had PCT recorded on admission. We assessed associations between variables of clinical interest and the primary outcomes of progression of COVID-19 and death during or within 30 days of hospitalization using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The study included 209 unique patients. In the univariate analysis, elevated PCT on admission was associated with higher odds of progression of COVID-19 or death (Odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.08-1.93) and mortality alone (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.17-2.11). In multivariate regression, PCT remained significantly associated with progression or death after holding chronic kidney disease (CKD) status constant (OR 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.93, p=0.003). Similarly, the association of PCT and death remained significant after adjusting for age (OR 1.54, 95% CI: 1.17-2.15). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized COVID-19 patients with underlying cancer, initial PCT levels on admission may be associated with prognosis, involving higher odds of progression of COVID-19 and/or mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Humans , Procalcitonin , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , Biomarkers , Neoplasms/diagnosis
13.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(12): 1624-1628, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35931373

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe effectiveness of mRNA vaccines by comparing 2-dose (2D) and 3-dose (3D) healthcare worker (HCW) recipients in the setting of Omicron variant dominance. Performance of 2D and 3D vaccine series against SARS-CoV-2 variants and the clinical outcomes of HCWs may inform return-to-work guidance. METHODS: In a retrospective study from December 15, 2020 to January 15, 2022, SARS-CoV-2 infections among HCWs at a large tertiary cancer centre in New York City were examined to estimate infection rates (aggregated positive tests / person-days) and 95% CIs over the Omicron period in 3D and 2D mRNA vaccinated HCWs and were compared using rate ratios. We described the clinical features of post-vaccine infections and impact of prior (pre-Omicron) COVID infection on vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: Among the 20857 HCWs in our cohort, 20,660 completed the 2D series with an mRNA vaccine during our study period and 12461 had received a third dose by January 15, 2022. The infection rate ratio for 3D versus 2D vaccinated HCWs was 0.667 (95% CI 0.623, 0.713) for an estimated 3D vaccine effectiveness of 33.3% compared to two doses only during the Omicron dominant period from December 15, 2021 to January 15, 2022. Breakthrough Omicron infections after 3D + 14 days occurred in 1,315 HCWs. Omicron infections were mild, with 16% of 3D and 11% 2D HCWs being asymptomatic. DISCUSSION: Study demonstrates improved vaccine-derived protection against COVID-19 infection in 3D versus 2D mRNA vaccinees during the Omicron surge. The advantage of 3D vaccination was maintained irrespective of prior COVID-19 infection status.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , RNA, Messenger/genetics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Health Personnel , mRNA Vaccines
14.
Support Care Cancer ; 30(9): 7491-7497, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35665859

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cannabis products, including the cannabinoids CBD and THC, are rising in popularity and increasingly used for medical purposes. While there is some evidence that cannabinoids improve cancer-associated symptoms, understanding regarding appropriate use remains incomplete. PURPOSE: To describe patient experiences with medical cannabis with focus on use contexts and patients' reported benefits and harms. METHODS: A standardized intake form was implemented in a dedicated medical cannabis clinic at an NCI-designated cancer center; data from this form was abstracted for all initial visits from October 2019 to October 2020. We report descriptive statistics, chi-square analysis, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 163 unique new patients, cannabis therapy was commonly sought for sleep, pain, anxiety, and appetite. Twenty-nine percent expressed interest for cancer treatment; 40% and 46% reported past use of CBD and THC, respectively, for medical purposes. Among past CBD users, the most commonly reported benefits were less pain (21%) or anxiety (17%) and improvement in sleep (15%); 92% reported no side effects. Among those with past THC use, reported benefits included improvement in appetite (40%), sleep (32%), nausea (28%), and pain (17%); side effects included feeling "high." Seeking cannabis for anti-neoplastic effects was associated with receipt of active cancer treatment in both univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Cancer patients seek medical cannabis to address a wide variety of concerns despite insufficient evidence of benefits and harms. As more states move to legalize medical and recreational cannabis, cancer care providers must remain aware of emerging data and develop knowledge and skills to counsel their patients about its use.


Subject(s)
Cannabinoids , Cannabis , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Medical Marijuana , Neoplasms , Analgesics/therapeutic use , Cannabinoids/therapeutic use , Dronabinol , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/drug therapy , Humans , Medical Marijuana/adverse effects , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Pain/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies
15.
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol ; 66(7): 993-1002, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35650174

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to assess contouring-related practices among US radiation oncologists and explore how access to and use of resources and quality improvement strategies vary based on individual- and organization-level factors. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study with a sequential explanatory design. Surveys were emailed to a random 10% sample of practicing US radiation oncologists. Participating physicians were invited to a semi-structured interview. Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and a multivariable regression model were used to evaluate associations. Interview data were coded using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Survey overall response rate was 24%, and subsequent completion rate was 97%. Contouring-related questions arise in ≥50% of clinical cases among 73% of respondents. Resources accessed first include published atlases (75%) followed by consulting another radiation oncologist (60%). Generalists access consensus guidelines more often than disease-site specialists (P = 0.04), while eContour.org is more often used by generalists (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.2-14.8) and younger physicians (OR 1.33 for each 5-year increase, 95% CI 1.08-1.67). Common physician-reported barriers to optimizing contour quality are time constraints (58%) and lack of access to disease-site specialists (21%). Forty percent (40%, n = 14) of physicians without access to disease-site specialists indicated it could facilitate the adoption of new treatments. Almost all (97%) respondents have formal peer review, but only 43% have contour-specific review, which is more common in academic centres (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Potential opportunities to improve radiation contour quality include improved access to disease-site specialists and contour-specific peer review. Physician time must be considered when designing new strategies.


Subject(s)
Radiation Oncologists , Radiation Oncology , Attitude , Humans , Peer Review , Surveys and Questionnaires
16.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(5): e2214268, 2022 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35622364

ABSTRACT

Importance: Antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria is not recommended in guidelines but is a major driver of inappropriate antibiotic use. Objective: To evaluate whether clinician culture and personality traits are associated with a predisposition toward inappropriate prescribing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study involved secondary analysis of a previously completed survey. A total of 723 primary care clinicians in active practice in Texas, the Mid-Atlantic, and the Pacific Northwest, including physicians and advanced practice clinicians, were surveyed from June 1, 2018, to November 26, 2019, regarding their approach to a hypothetical patient with asymptomatic bacteriuria. Clinician culture was represented by training background and region of practice. Attitudes and cognitive characteristics were represented using validated instruments to assess numeracy, risk-taking preferences, burnout, and tendency to maximize care. Data were analyzed from November 8, 2021, to March 29, 2022. Interventions: The survey described a male patient with asymptomatic bacteriuria and changes in urine character. Clinicians were asked to indicate whether they would prescribe antibiotics. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was self-reported willingness to prescribe antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria. Willingness to prescribe antibiotics was hypothesized to be associated with clinician characteristics, background, and attitudes, including orientation on the Medical Maximizer-Minimizer Scale. Individuals with a stronger orientation toward medical maximizing prefer treatment even when the value of treatment is ambiguous. Results: Of the 723 enrolled clinicians, 551 (median age, 32 years [IQR, 29-44 years]; 292 [53%] female; 296 [54%] White) completed the survey (76% response rate), including 288 resident physicians, 202 attending physicians, and 61 advanced practice clinicians. A total of 303 respondents (55%) were from the Mid-Atlantic, 136 (25%) were from Texas, and 112 (20%) were from the Pacific Northwest. A total of 392 clinicians (71% of respondents) indicated that they would prescribe antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria in the absence of an indication. In multivariable analyses, clinicians with a background in family medicine (odds ratio [OR], 2.93; 95% CI, 1.53-5.62) or a high score on the Medical Maximizer-Minimizer Scale (indicating stronger medical maximizing orientation; OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.38-3.09) were more likely to prescribe antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria. Resident physicians (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.85) and clinicians in the Pacific Northwest (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33-0.72) were less likely to prescribe antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this survey study suggest that most primary care clinicians prescribe inappropriate antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria in the absence of risk factors. This tendency is more pronounced among family medicine physicians and medical maximizers and is less common among resident physicians and clinicians in the US Pacific Northwest. Clinician characteristics should be considered when designing antibiotic stewardship interventions.


Subject(s)
Bacteriuria , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Attitude of Health Personnel , Bacteriuria/drug therapy , Cognition , Female , Humans , Male , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Primary Health Care
17.
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol ; 35: 76-83, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35620018

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Local treatment for bone metastases is becoming increasingly complex. National guidelines traditionally focus only on radiation therapy (RT), leaving a gap in clinical decision support resources available to clinicians. The objective of this study was to reach expert consensus regarding multidisciplinary management of non-spine bone metastases, which would facilitate standardizing treatment within an academic-community partnership. Methods and Materials: A multidisciplinary panel of physicians treating metastatic disease across the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Alliance, including community-based partner sites, was convened. Clinical questions rated of high importance in the management of non-spine bone metastases were identified via survey. A literature review was conducted, and panel physicians drafted initial recommendation statements. Consensus was gathered on recommendation statements through a modified Delphi process from a full panel of 17 physicians from radiation oncology, orthopaedic surgery, medical oncology, interventional radiology, and anesthesia pain. Consensus was defined a priori as 75% of respondents indicating "agree" or "strongly agree" with the consensus statement. Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy was employed to assign evidence strength for each statement. Results: Seventeen clinical questions were identified, of which 11 (65%) were selected for the consensus process. Consensus was reached for 16 of 17 answer statements (94%), of which 12 were approved after Round 1 and additional 4 approved after Round 2 of the modified Delphi voting process. Topics included indications for referral to surgery or interventional radiology, radiation fractionation and appropriate use of stereotactic approaches, and the handling of systemic therapies during radiation. Evidence strength was most commonly C (n = 7), followed by B (n = 5) and A (n = 3). Conclusions: Consensus among a multidisciplinary panel of community and academic physicians treating non-spine bone metastases was feasible. Recommendations will assist clinicians and potentially provide measures to reduce variation across diverse practice settings. Findings highlight areas for further research such as pathologic fracture risk estimation, pre-operative radiation, and percutaneous ablation.

18.
Am J Med ; 135(7): e182-e193, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35307357

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Variation in clinicians' diagnostic test utilization is incompletely explained by demographics and likely relates to cognitive characteristics. We explored clinician factors associated with diagnostic test utilization. METHODS: We used a self-administered survey of attitudes, cognitive characteristics, and reported likelihood of test ordering in common scenarios; frequency of lipid and liver testing in patients on statin therapy. Participants were 552 primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants from practices in 8 US states across 3 regions, from June 1, 2018 to November 26, 2019. We measured Testing Likelihood Score: the mean of 4 responses to testing frequency and self-reported testing frequency in patients on statins. RESULTS: Respondents were 52.4% residents, 36.6% attendings, and 11.0% nurse practitioners/physician assistants; most were white (53.6%) or Asian (25.5%). Median age was 32 years; 53.1% were female. Participants reported ordering tests for a median of 20% (stress tests) to 90% (mammograms) of patients; Testing Likelihood Scores varied widely (median 54%, interquartile range 43%-69%). Higher scores were associated with geography, training type, low numeracy, high malpractice fear, high medical maximizer score, high stress from uncertainty, high concern about bad outcomes, and low acknowledgment of medical uncertainty. More frequent testing of lipids and liver tests was associated with low numeracy, high medical maximizer score, high malpractice fear, and low acknowledgment of uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician variation in testing was common, with more aggressive testing consistently associated with low numeracy, being a medical maximizer, and low acknowledgment of uncertainty. Efforts to reduce undue variations in testing should consider clinician cognitive drivers.


Subject(s)
Nurse Practitioners , Physician Assistants , Adult , Attitude of Health Personnel , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures , Female , Humans , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires
20.
Cancer ; 128(3): 570-578, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34633662

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors receive more long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) than people without cancer, but the safety of LTOT prescribing is unknown. METHODS: Opioid-naive adults aged ≥66 years who had been diagnosed in 2008-2015 with breast, lung, head and neck, or colorectal cancer were identified with data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries linked with Medicare claims. Survivors with 1 or more LTOT episodes (≥90 consecutive days) occurring ≥1 year after their cancer diagnosis and before censoring at hospice entry, another cancer diagnosis, 6 months before death, or December 2016 were included. The safety of prescribing during the first 90 days of the first LTOT episode was measured during follow-up. As a positive safety indicator, the proportion of survivors with concurrent nonopioid pain management was measured. Indicators of less safe prescribing were the proportion of survivors with a high average daily opioid dose (≥90 morphine milligram equivalents) and the proportion of survivors with concurrent benzodiazepine dispensing. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify clinical predictors of each safety outcome. RESULTS: In all, 3628 cancer survivors received LTOT during follow-up (median duration, 4.9 months; interquartile range, 3.5-8.0 months). Seventy-two percent of the survivors received multimodal pain management concurrently with LTOT. Eight percent of the survivors had high-dose opioid prescriptions; 25% of the survivors received benzodiazepines during LTOT. Multivariable analyses identified variations in safety measures by multiple clinical factors, although none were consistently significant across outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: To improve safe LTOT prescribing for survivors, efforts should focus on increasing multimodal pain management and reducing inappropriate benzodiazepine prescribing. Different clinical predictors of each outcome suggest different drivers of safe prescribing.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Cancer Survivors , Neoplasms , Pain Management , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Humans , Medicare , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...