Application of Global Lung Function Initiative Global Spirometry Reference Equations across a Large, Multicenter Pulmonary Function Lab Population.

Rationale: Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) Global spirometry reference equations were recently derived to offer a "race-neutral" interpretation option. The impact of transitioning from the race-specific GLI-2012 to the GLI Global reference equations is unknown. Objectives: Describe the direction and magnitude of changes in predicted lung function measurements in a population of diverse race and ethnicity using GLI Global in place of GLI-2012 reference equations. Methods: In this multicenter cross-sectional study using a large pulmonary function laboratory database, 109,447 spirometry tests were reanalyzed using GLI Global reference equations and compared with the existing GLI-2012 standard, stratified by self-reported race and ethnicity. Measurements and Main Results: Mean FEV1 and FVC percent predicted increased in the White and Northeast Asian groups and decreased in the Black, Southeast Asian, and mixed/other race groups. The prevalence of obstruction increased by 9.7% in the White group, and prevalences of possible restriction increased by 51.1% and 37.1% in the Black and Southeast Asian groups, respectively. Using GLI Global in a population with equal representation of all five race and ethnicity groups altered the interpretation category for 10.2% of spirometry tests. Subjects who self-identified as Black were the only group with a relative increase in the frequency of abnormal spirometry test results (32.9%). Conclusions: The use of GLI Global reference equations will significantly impact spirometry interpretation. Although GLI Global offers an innovative approach to transition from race-specific reference equations, it is important to recognize the continued need to place these data within an appropriate clinical context.

Comparison of adult hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Adults who are hesitant toward routinely recommended vaccines for adults may also be hesitant toward COVID-19 vaccines. However, the distribution and differences in hesitancy between routinely recommended vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines, and the association of hesitancy regarding routinely recommended vaccines and hesitancy with COVID-19 vaccination status and intent, is unknown. METHODS: Using the Research and Development Survey (RANDS) during COVID-19, Round 3, a probability-sampled, nationally representative, web and phone survey fielded from May 17 - June 30, 2021 (n = 5,434), we examined the distribution and difference in prevalence of hesitancy towards COVID-19 and vaccines in general, beliefs associated with vaccine hesitancy, and factors impacting plans to be vaccinated against COVID-19. RESULTS: Reported hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines (42.2%) was 6-percentage points higher than hesitancy towards vaccines in general (35.7%). Populations who were most hesitant toward COVID-19 vaccines were younger adults, non-Hispanic Black adults, adults with lower education or income, and adults who were associated with a religion. Beliefs in the social benefit and the importance of vaccination, and the belief that COVID-19 vaccines lower risk for infection, were strongly associated with COVID-19 vaccination and intent to be vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine hesitancy for both COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general is common. Health providers and public health officials should utilize strategies to address vaccine hesitancy, including providing strong clear recommendations for needed vaccines, addressing safety and effectiveness concerns, and utilizing trusted messengers such as religious and community leaders to improve vaccine confidence.

Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis and Emphysema: A Narrative Review.

Combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) syndrome refers to co-occurrence of two disease processes in the lung that can be difficult to diagnose but is associated with high morbidity and mortality burden. Diagnosis of CPFE is challenging because the two diseases can counterbalance respective impairments resulting in deceivingly normal-appearing chest radiography and spirometry in a dyspneic patient. Although an international committee published the terminology and definitions of CPFE in 2022, consensus on exact diagnostic criteria and optimal management strategy is yet to be determined. Herein, we provide a narrative review summarizing the literature on CPFE from 1990 to 2022, including historical background, epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, imaging and pulmonary function findings, diagnosis, prognosis, complications, and treatment. Although CPFE was initially conceived as a variant presentation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, it has been recognized to occur in patients with a wide variety of interstitial lung diseases, including connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung diseases, and hypersensitivity pneumonitis. The affected patients have a heightened risk for pulmonary hypertension and lung cancer. Clinicians need to recognize the characteristic presenting features of CPFE along with prognostic implications of this entity.

National Center for Health Statistics' 2019 Research and Development Survey, RANDS 3.

Objective This report on the third round of the Research and Development Survey (RANDS 3) provides a general description of RANDS 3 and presents percentage estimates of selected demographic and health-related variables from the overall sample and by one set of experimental groups embedded in the survey. Statistical tests comparing estimates for the two randomized groups were conducted to evaluate the randomization. Methods NORC at the University of Chicago conducted RANDS 3 for the National Center of Health Statistics in 2019 using its AmeriSpeak Panel in web-only mode. To assess question-response patterns, probe questions and four sets of experiments were embedded in RANDS 3, with panelists randomized into two groups for each set of experiments. Participants in each group received questions with differences in wording, question-andresponse formats, or question order. Results Of the 4,255 people sampled, 2,646 completed RANDS 3 for a completion rate of 62.2% and a weighted cumulative response rate of 18.1%. Iterative raking was performed using demographic and selected health condition variables to calibrate the RANDS 3 sample to 2019 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) estimates. As a result, the overall demographic distribution and percentages of asthma, diabetes, hypertension, and high cholesterol for the calibrated RANDS 3 sample aligned with the percentages estimated from the 2019 NHIS. The distributions of demographic and healthrelated variables were comparable between the two randomized groups examined except for ever-diagnosed hypertension. Conclusion As part of a research series using probability-based survey panels, RANDS 3 included health-related questions with a focus on disability and opioids. Because RANDS is an ongoing research platform, a variety of persistent and emergent research questions relating to survey methodology will continue to be examined in current and future rounds of RANDS.

Prevalence of influenza-specific vaccination hesitancy among adults in the United States, 2018.

BACKGROUND: The role of vaccine hesitancy on influenza vaccination is not clearly understood. Low influenza vaccination coverage in U.S. adults suggests that a multitude of factors may be responsible for under-vaccination or non-vaccination including vaccine hesitancy. Understanding the role of influenza vaccination hesitancy is important for targeted messaging and intervention to increase influenza vaccine confidence and uptake. The objective of this study was to quantify the prevalence of adult influenza vaccination hesitancy (IVH) and examine association of IVH beliefs with sociodemographic factors and early-season influenza vaccination. METHODS: A four-question validated IVH module was included in the 2018 National Internet Flu Survey. Weighted proportions and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify correlates of IVH beliefs. RESULTS: Overall, 36.9% of adults were hesitant to receive an influenza vaccination; 18.6% expressed concerns about vaccination side effects; 14.8% personally knew someone with serious side effects; and 35.6% reported that their healthcare provider was not the most trusted source of information about influenza vaccinations. Influenza vaccination ranged from 15.3 to 45.2 percentage points lower among adults self-reporting any of the four IVH beliefs. Being female, age 18-49 years, non-Hispanic Black, having high school or lower education, being employed, and not having primary care medical home were associated with hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: Among the four IVH beliefs studied, being hesitant to receiving influenza vaccination followed by mistrust of healthcare providers were identified as the most influential hesitancy beliefs. Two in five adults in the United States were hesitant to receive an influenza vaccination, and hesitancy was negatively associated with vaccination. This information may assist with targeted interventions, personalized to the individual, to reduce hesitancy and thus improve influenza vaccination acceptance.

Adjusting diffusing capacity for anemia in patients undergoing allogeneic HCT: a comparison of two methodologies.

BACKGROUND: Diffusing capacity (DLCO) measurements are affected by hemoglobin. Two adjustment equations are used: Cotes (recommended by ATS/ERS) and Dinakara (used in the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation comorbidity index [HCT-CI]). It is unknown how these methods compare, and which is better from a prognostication standpoint. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort of 1273 adult patients who underwent allogeneic HCT, completed a pre-transplant DLCO and had a concurrent hemoglobin measurement. Non-relapse mortality was measured using competing risk analysis. RESULTS: Patients had normal spirometry (FEV1 99.7% [IQR: 89.4-109.8%; FVC 100.1% [IQR: 91.0-109.6%] predicted), left ventricular ejection fraction (57.2[6.7]%) and right ventricular systolic pressure (30.1[7.0] mmHg). Cotes-DLCO was 85.6% (IQR: 76.5-95.7%) and Dinakara-DLCO was 103.6% (IQR: 90.7-117.2%) predicted. For anemic patients (Hb<10g/dL), Cotes-DLCO was 84.2% (IQR: 73.9-94.1%) while Dinakara-DLCO 111.0% (97.3-124.7%) predicted. Cotes-DLCO increased HCT-CI score for 323 (25.4%) and decreased for 4 (0.3%) patients. Cotes-DLCO was superior for predicting non-relapse mortality: for both mild (66-80% predicted, HR 1.55 [95%CI: 1.26-1.92, p < 0.001]) and moderate (<65% predicted, HR 2.11 [95%CI: 1.55-2.87, p<0.001]) impairment. In contrast, for Dinakara-DLCO, only mild impairment (HR 1.69 [95%CI 1.26-2.27, p < 0.001]) was associated with lower survival while moderate impairment was not (HR 1.44 [95%CI: 0.64-3.21, p = 0.4]). In multivariable analyses, after adjusting for demographics, hematologic variables, cardiac function and FEV1, Cotes-DLCO was predictive of overall survival at 1-year (OR 0.98 [95%CI: 0.97-1.00], p = 0.01), but Dinakara-DLCO was not (OR 1.00 [95%CI: 0.98-1.00], p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: The ERS/ATS recommended Cotes method likely underestimates DLCO in patients with anemia, whereas the Dinakara (used in the HCT-CI score) overestimates DLCO. The Cotes method is superior to the Dinakara method score in predicting overall survival and relapse-free survival in patients undergoing allogeneic HCT.

Mixed-methods analysis of select issues reported in the 2016 World Health Organization verbal autopsy questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Use of a standardized verbal autopsy (VA) questionnaire, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) instrument, can improve the consistency and reliability of the data it collects. Systematically revising a questionnaire, however, requires evidence about the performance of its questions. The purpose of this investigation was to use a mixed methods approach to evaluate the performance of questions related to 14 previously reported issues in the 2016 version of the WHO questionnaire, where there were concerns of potential confusion, redundancy, or inability of the respondent to answer the question. The results from this mixed methods analysis are discussed across common themes that may have contributed to the underperformance of questions and have been compiled to inform decisions around the revision of the current VA instrument. METHODS: Quantitative analysis of 19,150 VAs for neonates, children, and adults from five project teams implementing VAs predominately in Sub-Saharan Africa included frequency distributions and cross-tabulations to evaluate response patterns among related questions. The association of respondent characteristics and response patterns was evaluated using prevalence ratios. Qualitative analysis included results from cognitive interviewing, an approach that provides a detailed understanding of the meanings and processes that respondents use to answer interview questions. Cognitive interviews were conducted among 149 participants in Morocco and Zambia. Findings from the qualitative and quantitative analyses were triangulated to identify common themes. RESULTS: Four broad themes contributing to the underperformance or redundancy within the instrument were identified: question sequence, overlap within the question series, questions outside the frame of reference of the respondent, and questions needing clarification. The series of questions associated with one of the 14 identified issues (the series of questions on injuries) related to question sequence; seven (tobacco use, sores, breast swelling, abdominal problem, vomiting, vaccination, and baby size) demonstrated similar response patterns among questions within each series capturing overlapping information. Respondent characteristics, including relationship to the deceased and whether or not the respondent lived with the deceased, were associated with differing frequencies of non-substantive responses in three question series (female health related issues, tobacco use, and baby size). An inconsistent understanding of related constructs was observed between questions related to sores/ulcers, birth weight/baby size, and diagnosis of dementia/presence of mental confusion. An incorrect association of the intended construct with that which was interpreted by the respondent was observed in the medical diagnosis question series. CONCLUSIONS: In this mixed methods analysis, we identified series of questions which could be shortened through elimination of redundancy, series of questions requiring clarification due to unclear constructs, and the impact of respondent characteristics on the quality of responses. These changes can lead to a better understanding of the question constructs by the respondents, increase the acceptance of the tool, and improve the overall accuracy of the VA instrument.

Question evaluation for real-time surveys: Lessons from COVID-19 data collection.

The need for high-quality, real-time data has never presented itself as clearly as it did during the COVID-19 pandemic. Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, from both a policy and a public health perspective, required timely, accurate data about the public's attitudes and behaviors from health surveillance, monitoring, and public opinion surveys. The uniqueness of the COVID-19 pandemic also created particular challenges for survey data collection, specifically, how to develop high quality survey questions on topics that had never been previously fielded. To account for this challenge, the National Center for Health Statistics adopted an iterative, two-component, mixed-method approach to question design and evaluation. The first, a cognitive interviewing study using virtual, online interviews was used to produce interpretative schemata of the response processes underlying the survey questions. The second, a two-round, mixed method survey using a statistically-sampled panel, was designed to further develop the interpretive schemata and to allow for detailed subgroup analyses. To increase the usefulness of the survey's second round, cognitive interview findings and results from the survey's first round were used to develop both open- and close-ended embedded probes. Taken together, the studies reveal the specific problems for question-design during such a novel, quickly-evolving event: 1) a lack of shared understanding of novel concepts and vocabulary, 2) the shifting reference period respondents use to think about attitudes and behaviors during a multi-year event, 3) the pervasive nature of the event that therefore frames how respondents conceptualize and process questions about unrelated topics. This iterative approach to understanding question-design problems not only allowed for the continuing improvement of COVID-19 survey items, going forward, it also provided a methodological foundation for question development for high quality, real-time data collection.

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) during COVID-19.

The National Center for Health Statistics' (NCHS) Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a series of commercial panel surveys collected for methodological research purposes. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, NCHS expanded the use of RANDS to rapidly monitor aspects of the public health emergency. The RANDS during COVID-19 survey was designed to include COVID-19 related health outcome and cognitive probe questions. Rounds 1 and 2 were fielded June 9-July 6, 2020 and August 3-20, 2020 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel. Existing and new approaches were used to: 1) evaluate question interpretation and performance to improve future COVID-19 data collections and 2) to produce a set of experimental estimates for public release using weights which were calibrated to NCHS' National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to adjust for potential bias in the panel. Through the expansion of the RANDS platform and ongoing methodological research, NCHS reported timely information about COVID-19 in the United States and demonstrated the use of recruited panels for reporting national health statistics. This report describes the use of RANDS for reporting on the pandemic and the associated methodological survey design decisions including the adaptation of question evaluation approaches and calibration of panel weights.

Use of a Viral Filter to Reduce Exposure to Exhaled Aerosol Does Not Affect Methacholine Dose Delivery During Bronchoprovocation Testing.

BACKGROUND: Methacholine challenge testing (MCT) is a common bronchoprovocation technique used to assess airway hyper-responsiveness. We previously demonstrated that the addition of a viral filter to the nebulizer exhalation limb substantially reduced expelled particles during MCT. Our aim was to evaluate whether this modification affects the delivered dose of methacholine. METHODS: A mechanical ventilator was connected to a lung simulator with breathing frequency 15 breaths/min, tidal volume 500 mL, inspiratory-expiratory ratio 1:1, with a sinusoidal waveform. We compared methacholine dose delivery using the Hudson Micro Mist or AeroEclipse II BAN nebulizers powered by either a dry gas source or a compressor system. A filter placed in line between the nebulizer and test lung was weighed before and after 1 min of nebulized methacholine delivery. Mean inhaled mass was measured with and without a viral filter on the exhalation limb. Dose delivery was calculated by multiplying the mean inhaled mass by the respirable fraction (particles < 5 µm) and inhalation time. Unpaired t test was used to compare methacholine dose delivery with and without viral filter placement. RESULTS: The addition of a viral filter did not significantly affect methacholine dose delivery across all devices tested. Using a 50-psi dry gas source, dose delivered with or without a viral filter did not differ with the Hudson (422.3 µg vs 282.0 µg, P = .11) or the AeroEclipse nebulizer (563.0 µg vs 657.6 µg, P = .59). Using the compressor, dose delivered with and without a viral filter did not differ with the Hudson (974.0 µg vs 868.0 µg, P = .03) or the AeroEclipse nebulizer (818.0 µg vs 628.5 µg, P = .42). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a viral filter to the nebulizer exhalation limb did not affect methacholine dose during bronchoprovocation testing. Routine use of a viral filter should be considered to improve pulmonary function technician safety and infection control measures during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of hepatopulmonary syndrome in liver transplantation candidates and the role of angiogenesis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatopulmonary syndrome affects 10-30% of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. We evaluated the serum angiogenic profile of hepatopulmonary syndrome and assessed the clinical impact of hepatopulmonary syndrome in patients evaluated for liver transplantation. METHODS: The Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease 2 study was a multicentre, prospective cohort study of adults undergoing their first liver transplantation evaluation. Hepatopulmonary syndrome was defined as an alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient ≥15 mmHg (≥20 mmHg if age >64 years), positive contrast-enhanced transthoracic echocardiography and absence of lung disease. RESULTS: We included 85 patients with hepatopulmonary syndrome and 146 patients without hepatopulmonary syndrome. Patients with hepatopulmonary syndrome had more complications of portal hypertension and slightly higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Na score compared to those without hepatopulmonary syndrome (median (interquartile range) 15 (12-19) versus 14 (10-17), p=0.006). Hepatopulmonary syndrome patients had significantly lower 6-min walk distance and worse functional class. Hepatopulmonary syndrome patients had higher circulating angiopoietin 2, Tie2, tenascin C, tyrosine protein kinase Kit (c-Kit), vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 and von Willebrand factor levels, and lower E-selectin levels. Patients with hepatopulmonary syndrome had an increased risk of death (hazard ratio 1.80, 95% CI 1.03-3.16, p=0.04), which persisted despite adjustment for covariates (hazard ratio 1.79, 95% CI 1.02-3.15, p=0.04). This association did not vary based on levels of oxygenation, reflecting the severity of hepatopulmonary syndrome. CONCLUSION: Hepatopulmonary syndrome was associated with a profile of abnormal systemic angiogenesis, worse exercise and functional capacity, and an overall increased risk of death.

Identifying and Minimizing Errors in the Measurement of Early Childhood Development: Lessons Learned from the Cognitive Testing of the ECDI2030.

Challenges in measuring early childhood development (ECD) at scale have been documented, yet little is known about the specific difficulties related to questionnaire design and question interpretation. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the challenges of measuring ECD at scale in the context of household surveys and to show how to overcome them. The paper uses examples from the cognitive interviewing exercises that were conducted as part of the methodological work to develop a measure of ECD outcomes, the ECDI2030. It describes the methodological work carried out to inform the selection and improvement of question items and survey implementation tools as a fundamental step to reduce and mitigate systematic measurement error and improve data quality. The project consisted of a total of five rounds of testing, comprising 191 one-on-one, in-depth cognitive interviews across six countries (Bulgaria, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Uganda, and the USA). Qualitative data analysis methods were used to determine matches and mismatches between intention of items and false positives or false negative answers among subgroups of respondents. Key themes emerged that could potentially lead to systematic measurement error in population-based surveys on ECD: (1) willingness of child to perform task versus ability of child to perform task; (2) performing task versus performing task correctly; (3) identifying letters or numbers versus recognizing letters or numbers; (4) consistently performing task versus correctly performing task; (5) applicability of skills being asked versus observability of skills being asked; and (6) language production versus language comprehension. Through an iterative process of testing and subsequent revision, improvements were made to item wording, response options, and interviewer training instructions. Given the difficulties inherent in population-level data collection in the context of global monitoring, this study's findings confirm the importance of cognitive testing as a crucial step in careful, culturally relevant, and sensitive questionnaire design and as a means to reduce response bias in cross-cultural contexts.

Aerosol Generation and Mitigation During Methacholine Bronchoprovocation Testing: Infection Control Implications in the Era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Methacholine bronchoprovocation or challenge testing (MCT) is commonly performed to assess airway hyper-responsiveness in the setting of suspected asthma. Nebulization is an aerosol-generating procedure, but little is known about the risks of MCT in the context of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We aimed to quantify and characterize aerosol generation during MCT by using different delivery methods and to assess the impact of adding a viral filter. METHODS: Seven healthy subjects performed simulated MCT in a near particle-free laboratory space with 4 different nebulizers and with a dosimeter. Two devices continuously sampled the ambient air during the procedure, which detected ultrafine particles, from 0.02-1 µm, and particles of sizes 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, and 10 µm, respectively. Particle generation was compared among all the devices, with and without viral filter placement. RESULTS: Ultrafine-particle generation during simulated MCT was significant across all the devices. Ultrafine-particle (0.02-1 µm) concentrations decreased 77%-91% with the addition of a viral filter and varied significantly between unfiltered (P < .001) and filtered devices (P < .001). Ultrafine-particle generation was lowest when using the dosimeter with filtered Hudson nebulizer (1,258 ± 1,644 particle/mL). Ultrafine-particle concentrations with the filtered nebulizer devices using a compressor were higher than particle concentrations detected when using the dosimeter: Monaghan (3,472 ± 1,794 particles/mL), PARI (4,403 ± 2,948), Hudson (6,320 ± 1,787) and AirLife (9,523 ± 5,098). CONCLUSIONS: The high particle concentrations generated during MCT pose significant infection control concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Particle generation during MCT was significantly reduced by using breath-actuated delivery and a viral filter, which offers an effective mitigation strategy.

The National Center for Health Statistics' 2015 and 2016 Research and Development Surveys.

Objective: This report provides a general description of the background and operation of the first two rounds of the Research and Development Survey (RANDS), a series of cross-sectional surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels. The Division of Research and Methodology of the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) conducted the first two rounds of RANDS in 2015 and 2016. RANDS 1 and 2 are being used primarily for question design evaluation and for investigating statistical methodologies for estimation. Methods: NCHS contracted with Gallup, Inc. to conduct RANDS 1 in Fall 2015 and RANDS 2 in Spring 2016. RANDS 1 and 2 were conducted using a web survey mode and included survey questions from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) that were specifically chosen to provide comparison and evaluation of the survey methodology properties of web surveys and traditional household surveys. In this report, some demographic and health estimates are provided from both sources to describe the RANDS data. Results: In RANDS 1, 2,304 out of the original 9,809 invited panel members completed the survey, for a completion rate of 23.5%. In RANDS 2, 2,480 of the initial 8,231 invited respondents completed the survey, for a completion rate of 30.1%. RANDS 1 and 2 participants were similar to the quarterly NHIS participants with respect to sex, census region, and whether they had worked for pay in the previous week. Other characteristics varied, including age, race and ethnicity, and income. Most health estimates differed between RANDS and NHIS. Public-use versions of the RANDS data can be found at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/rands. Conclusion: RANDS is an ongoing platform for research to understand the properties of probability-sampled recruited panels of primarily web users, investigating and developing statistical methods for using such data in conjunction with large nationally representative health surveys, and for extending question-design evaluations.

Parental Vaccine Hesitancy and Childhood Influenza Vaccination.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the prevalence of parental vaccine hesitancy (VH) in the United States and examine the association of VH with sociodemographics and childhood influenza vaccination coverage. METHODS: A 6-question VH module was included in the 2018 and 2019 National Immunization Survey-Flu, a telephone survey of households with children age 6 months to 17 years. RESULTS: The percentage of children having a parent reporting they were "hesitant about childhood shots" was 25.8% in 2018 and 19.5% in 2019. The prevalence of concern about the number of vaccines a child gets at one time impacting the decision to get their child vaccinated was 22.8% in 2018 and 19.1% in 2019; the prevalence of concern about serious, long-term side effects impacting the parent's decision to get their child vaccinated was 27.3% in 2018 and 21.7% in 2019. Only small differences in VH by sociodemographic variables were found, except for an 11.9 percentage point higher prevalence of "hesitant about childhood shots" and 9.9 percentage point higher prevalence of concerns about serious, long-term side effects among parents of Black compared with white children. In both seasons studied, children of parents reporting they were "hesitant about childhood shots" had 26 percentage points lower influenza vaccination coverage compared with children of parents not reporting hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: One in 5 children in the United States have a parent who is vaccine hesitant, and hesitancy is negatively associated with childhood influenza vaccination. Monitoring VH could help inform immunization programs as they develop and target methods to increase vaccine confidence and vaccination coverage.

Ready, set, go!: exploring use of a readiness process to implement pharmacy services.

BACKGROUND: Readiness is an essential precursor of successful implementation; however, its conceptualization and application has proved elusive. R = MC2 operationalizes readiness for use in practice. The purpose of this study was to (1) describe the application of R = MC2 to assess and build readiness in nine healthcare sites responsible for implementing medication management services and (2) gain insights into the sites' experience. METHODS: This mixed methods exploratory study used data collected as part of a process evaluation. Understanding application of the readiness process (Aim 1) involved examining team members' involvement (who?), readiness challenges and readiness building strategies (what?), strategy execution (how much?), and resulting changes (for what purpose?). To understand the sites' experience with the R = MC2 system (Aim 2), interviews were conducted with six of the sites to identify facilitators, barriers, and lessons learned. Data sources included a document review (e.g., sites' action plans), survey results, and interview data. RESULTS: Sites included primary care and specialty clinics, pharmacies within health systems, and community pharmacies. Teams consisted of 4-11 members, including a lead pharmacist. The teams' readiness activities clustered into five broad categories of readiness building strategies (e.g., building the operational infrastructure for service integration). Of the 34 strategies identified across sites, 68% were still in progress after 4 months. Engaging in the readiness process resulted in a number of outputs (e.g., data management systems) and benefits (e.g., an opportunity to ensure alignment of priorities and fit of the intervention). Based on the interviews, facilitators of the readiness process included assistance from a coach, internal support, and access to the readiness tools. Competing priorities and lack of resources, timely decision-making, and the timing of the readiness process were cited as barriers. The importance of service fit, stakeholder engagement, access to a structured approach, and rightsizing the readiness process emerged as lessons learned. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide valuable insights into the application of a readiness process. If readiness is to be integrated into routine practice as part of any implementation effort, it is critical to gain a better understanding of its application and value.

Prevalence and Impact of Restrictive Lung Disease in Liver Transplant Candidates.

We investigated the prevalence of spirometric restriction in liver transplantation (LT) candidates and the clinical impacts of restriction. We performed a cross-sectional study within the Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease 2 (PVCLD2) study, a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients being evaluated for LT. Patients with obstructive lung disease or missing spirometry or chest imaging were excluded. Patients with and without restriction, defined as a forced vital capacity (FVC) <70% predicted, were compared. Restriction prevalence was 18.4% (63/343). Higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-sodium score (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.11; P = 0.007), the presence of pleural effusions (OR, 3.59; 95% CI, 1.96-6.58; P < 0.001), and a history of ascites (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.26-5.33; P = 0.01) were associated with the presence of restriction, though one-third with restriction had neither pleural effusions nor ascites. In multivariate analysis, restriction was significantly and independently associated with lower 6-minute walk distances (least squares mean, 342.0 [95% CI, 316.6-367.4] m versus 395.7 [95% CI, 381.2-410.2] m; P < 0.001), dyspnea (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.46-4.95; P = 0.002), and lower physical component summary Short Form 36 scores indicating worse quality of life (least squares mean, 34.1 [95% CI, 31.5-36.7] versus 38.2 [95% CI, 36.6-39.7]; P = 0.004). Lower FVC percent predicted was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.27 per 10-point decrease in FVC percent predicted; P = 0.01). Restriction and abnormal lung function are common in LT candidates; can be present in the absence of an obvious cause, such as pleural effusions or ascites; and is associated with worse exercise capacity, quality of life, and survival.

Overview and Initial Results of the National Center for Health Statistics' Research and Development Survey.

The National Center for Health Statistics is assessing the usefulness of recruited web panels in multiple research areas. One research area examines the use of close-ended probe questions and split-panel experiments for evaluating question-response patterns. Another research area is the development of statistical methodology to leverage the strength of national survey data to evaluate, and possibly improve, health estimates from recruited panels. Recruited web panels, with their lower cost and faster production cycle, in combination with established population health surveys, may be useful for some purposes for statistical agencies. Our initial results indicate that web survey data from a recruited panel can be used for question evaluation studies without affecting other survey content. However, the success of these data to provide estimates that align with those from large national surveys will depend on many factors, including further understanding of design features of the recruited panel (e.g. coverage and mode effects), the statistical methods and covariates used to obtain the original and adjusted weights, and the health outcomes of interest.

The Effects of Embedding Closed-ended Cognitive Probes in a Web Survey on Survey Response.

Web, or online, probing has the potential to supplement existing questionnaire design processes by providing structured cognitive data on a wider sample than typical qualitative-only question evaluation methods can achieve. One of the practical impediments to the further integration of web probing is the concern of survey managers about how the probes themselves may affect response to other items and to a questionnaire as a whole. This study explores the effects web probes had on response to a self-administered web survey by comparing two rounds of this survey-one without web probes and one with web probes-that were administered to a probability-based panel of approximately 100,000 American adults. While the item response to the probes themselves appears to be related to the way they are formatted, the findings indicate that web probes do not have an overall negative effect on a questionnaire in which they are embedded.

Metoprolol for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of COPD.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies suggest that beta-blockers may reduce the risk of exacerbations and death in patients with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but these findings have not been confirmed in randomized trials. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized trial, we assigned patients between the ages of 40 and 85 years who had COPD to receive either a beta-blocker (extended-release metoprolol) or placebo. All the patients had a clinical history of COPD, along with moderate airflow limitation and an increased risk of exacerbations, as evidenced by a history of exacerbations during the previous year or the prescribed use of supplemental oxygen. We excluded patients who were already taking a beta-blocker or who had an established indication for the use of such drugs. The primary end point was the time until the first exacerbation of COPD during the treatment period, which ranged from 336 to 350 days, depending on the adjusted dose of metoprolol. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 65.0±7.8 years; the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was 41.1±16.3% of the predicted value. The trial was stopped early because of futility with respect to the primary end point and safety concerns. There was no significant between-group difference in the median time until the first exacerbation, which was 202 days in the metoprolol group and 222 days in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metoprolol vs. placebo, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.32; P = 0.66). Metoprolol was associated with a higher risk of exacerbation leading to hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.83). The frequency of side effects that were possibly related to metoprolol was similar in the two groups, as was the overall rate of nonrespiratory serious adverse events. During the treatment period, there were 11 deaths in the metoprolol group and 5 in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with moderate or severe COPD who did not have an established indication for beta-blocker use, the time until the first COPD exacerbation was similar in the metoprolol group and the placebo group. Hospitalization for exacerbation was more common among the patients treated with metoprolol. (Funded by the Department of Defense; BLOCK COPD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02587351.).