Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 27
Filter
1.
Ann Intern Med ; 177(4): 484-496, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38467001

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is increasing concern for the potential impact of health care algorithms on racial and ethnic disparities. PURPOSE: To examine the evidence on how health care algorithms and associated mitigation strategies affect racial and ethnic disparities. DATA SOURCES: Several databases were searched for relevant studies published from 1 January 2011 to 30 September 2023. STUDY SELECTION: Using predefined criteria and dual review, studies were screened and selected to determine: 1) the effect of algorithms on racial and ethnic disparities in health and health care outcomes and 2) the effect of strategies or approaches to mitigate racial and ethnic bias in the development, validation, dissemination, and implementation of algorithms. DATA EXTRACTION: Outcomes of interest (that is, access to health care, quality of care, and health outcomes) were extracted with risk-of-bias assessment using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool and adapted CARE-CPM (Critical Appraisal for Racial and Ethnic Equity in Clinical Prediction Models) equity extension. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixty-three studies (51 modeling, 4 retrospective, 2 prospective, 5 prepost studies, and 1 randomized controlled trial) were included. Heterogenous evidence on algorithms was found to: a) reduce disparities (for example, the revised kidney allocation system), b) perpetuate or exacerbate disparities (for example, severity-of-illness scores applied to critical care resource allocation), and/or c) have no statistically significant effect on select outcomes (for example, the HEART Pathway [history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors, and troponin]). To mitigate disparities, 7 strategies were identified: removing an input variable, replacing a variable, adding race, adding a non-race-based variable, changing the racial and ethnic composition of the population used in model development, creating separate thresholds for subpopulations, and modifying algorithmic analytic techniques. LIMITATION: Results are mostly based on modeling studies and may be highly context-specific. CONCLUSION: Algorithms can mitigate, perpetuate, and exacerbate racial and ethnic disparities, regardless of the explicit use of race and ethnicity, but evidence is heterogeneous. Intentionality and implementation of the algorithm can impact the effect on disparities, and there may be tradeoffs in outcomes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research.


Subject(s)
Ethnicity , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Prospective Studies , Quality of Health Care
2.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 2024 Apr 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38477470

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is substantial variability in patient outcomes for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) across hospitals. This study aimed to identify hospital factors associated with GIB outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized for GIB from 2016 to 2018. These data were merged with the American Hospital Association Annual Survey data to incorporate hospital characteristics. We used generalized linear mixed-effect models to estimate the effect of hospital-level characteristics on patient outcomes after adjusting for patient risk factors including anticoagulant and antiplatelet use, recent GIB, and comorbidities. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality, and secondary outcomes included length of stay and a composite outcome of 30-day readmission or mortality. RESULTS: Factors associated with improved GIB 30-day mortality included large hospital size (defined as beds >400, odds ratio [OR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.97), greater case volume (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98), increased resident and nurse staffing (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.94), and blood donor center designation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.99). Patients treated at a hospital with multiple advanced capabilities, such as availability of advanced endoscopy, advanced intensive care unit (ICU) capabilities (both a medical-surgical ICU and cardiac ICU), blood donor center, and liver transplant center, had a 22% reduction in 30-day mortality risk, compared with those hospitalized in a hospital with none of these services (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.91). However, length of stay increased with additional services. DISCUSSION: Patients hospitalized for GIB at hospitals with multiple advanced specialized capabilities have lower mortality but longer lengths of stay. Further research should examine the processes of care linked to these services that contribute to improved mortality in GIB.

3.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 42(10): 1369-1373, 2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37782875

ABSTRACT

As the use of artificial intelligence has spread rapidly throughout the US health care system, concerns have been raised about racial and ethnic biases built into the algorithms that often guide clinical decision making. Race-based medicine, which relies on algorithms that use race as a proxy for biological differences, has led to treatment patterns that are inappropriate, unjust, and harmful to minoritized racial and ethnic groups. These patterns have contributed to persistent disparities in health and health care. To reduce these disparities, we recommend a race-aware approach to clinical decision support that considers social and environmental factors such as structural racism and social determinants of health. Recent policy changes in medical specialty societies and innovations in algorithm development represent progress on the path to dismantling race-based medicine. Success will require continued commitment and sustained efforts among stakeholders in the health care, research, and technology sectors. Increasing the diversity of clinical trial populations, broadening the focus of precision medicine, improving education about the complex factors shaping health outcomes, and developing new guidelines and policies to enable culturally responsive care are important next steps.


Subject(s)
Health Equity , Racism , Humans , Artificial Intelligence , Delivery of Health Care , Ethnicity , Clinical Decision-Making
4.
Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc ; 25(3): 284-296, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37808233

ABSTRACT

Increases in colorectal cancer screening are linked to the declining incidence of the disease over the past three decades. These favorable trends, however, are not observed in marginalized racial and ethnic populations with disproportionately lower rates of screening, higher disease incidence, and increased mortality despite advances in health technology and policy. This review describes the differences in screening uptake and test selection amongst racial and ethnic groups, discusses known obstacles and facilitators that impact screening, and highlights existing frameworks developed to achieve health equity in colorectal cancer screening.

5.
Trauma Violence Abuse ; 24(5): 3363-3383, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36341578

ABSTRACT

Workplace violence in healthcare settings is alarmingly common and represents significant financial and human cost. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and summarize evidence on strategies to prevent and/or manage workplace violence in healthcare settings. Searches were limited to evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and systematic reviews published between 2015 and 2021. Multiple databases were searched and screened. Quality of the included guidelines and reviews was also assessed. Three guidelines and 33 systematic reviews were included. Both the Occupational Safety and Health Administration 2015 and Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario 2019 guidelines provided useful recommendations for building a comprehensive prevention program. Evidence-based risk assessment, prevention and management, and education and training are all central components. Regular reassessment and adjustment is required. Included reviews (n = 33) were grouped into five main categories: violence toward nurses (n = 10); violence toward healthcare workers in general (n = 8); violence in the emergency department (n = 5); violence related to mental health (n = 5); and measurement related to workplace violence (n = 5). Multicomponent interventions were often more effective than those applied in isolation. We found consistent support for certain strategies including education and training, post-incident debriefing, multidisciplinary rapid response teams, and environmental modifications; however, the strength of evidence and certainty of conclusions were limited across reviews. This scoping review found that strong leadership that cultivates and enforces a culture of inclusivity, support, and respect is a prerequisite for a successful workplace violence prevention program. Rigorous comparative effectiveness research testing interventions are needed.

6.
Dig Dis Sci ; 67(10): 4678-4686, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35031875

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hospitals are held accountable for quality metrics, through public reporting programs and by payers. However, little is known about hospital performance in GIB nationally. METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal analysis utilizing Vizient's database was performed to identify GIB hospitalizations across 349 hospitals from 2016 to 2018. The primary outcome was risk-adjusted mortality; secondary outcomes included risk-adjusted length of stay and complication rate. Trends in performance were characterized using quintiles, with analysis of concordance within hospitals and across hospitals over time. Pearson's correlation coefficients were performed to assess the relationship among metrics. RESULTS: 28.1% of hospitals had a steadily improving risk-adjusted mortality index from 2016 to 2018, while 15.5% were steadily worsening in mortality. For LOS, 25.2% of hospitals were improving, while 22.4% deteriorated. For complication rate, 22.9% of hospitals steadily improved, while 19.2% of hospitals deteriorated. Although many hospitals improved substantially in one outcome, they did not necessarily improve in all outcomes. Of the 98 hospitals that steadily improved in mortality from 2016 to 2018, only 8 out of 98 steadily improved in all three outcomes (8.3%). Across all 3 years, mortality was weakly correlated with LOS (r = 0.22, p < 0.001), but not with the rate of complications (r = 0.08, p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Hospital performance metrics for GIB, such as mortality, length of stay, and complication rate, are weakly correlated and thus likely measure different aspects of care. While many hospitals improved over time, few hospitals improved in all three metrics. Additionally, many hospitals are deteriorating over time, and further research is needed to determine which care processes are associated with better outcomes.


Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Hospitalization , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals , Humans , Length of Stay , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(9): e2125846, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34542615

ABSTRACT

Importance: Many strategies to reduce hospital length of stay (LOS) have been implemented, but few studies have evaluated hospital-led interventions focused on high-risk populations. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Learning Health System panel commissioned this study to further evaluate system-level interventions for LOS reduction. Objective: To identify and synthesize evidence regarding potential systems-level strategies to reduce LOS for patients at high risk for prolonged LOS. Evidence Review: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE and Embase, were searched for English-language systematic reviews from January 1, 2010, through September 30, 2020, with updated searches through January 19, 2021. The scope of the protocol was determined with input from AHRQ Key Informants. Systematic reviews were included if they reported on hospital-led interventions intended to decrease LOS for high-risk populations, defined as those with high-risk medical conditions or socioeconomically vulnerable populations (eg, patients with high levels of socioeconomic risk, who are medically uninsured or underinsured, with limited English proficiency, or who are hospitalized at a safety-net, tertiary, or quaternary care institution). Exclusion criteria included interventions that were conducted outside of the hospital setting, including community health programs. Data extraction was conducted independently, with extraction of strength of evidence (SOE) ratings provided by systematic reviews; if unavailable, SOE was assessed using the AHRQ Evidence-Based Practice Center methods guide. Findings: Our searches yielded 4432 potential studies. We included 19 systematic reviews reported in 20 articles. The reviews described 8 strategies for reducing LOS in high-risk populations: discharge planning, geriatric assessment, medication management, clinical pathways, interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary care, case management, hospitalist services, and telehealth. Interventions were most frequently designed for older patients, often those who were frail (9 studies), or patients with heart failure. There were notable evidence gaps, as there were no systematic reviews studying interventions for patients with socioeconomic risk. For patients with medically complex conditions, discharge planning, medication management, and interdisciplinary care teams were associated with inconsistent outcomes (LOS, readmissions, mortality) across populations. For patients with heart failure, clinical pathways and case management were associated with reduced length of stay (clinical pathways: mean difference reduction, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.33 to 2.44] days; case management: mean difference reduction, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.52 to 2.04] days). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found inconsistent results across all high-risk populations on the effectiveness associated with interventions, such as discharge planning, that are often widely used by health systems. This systematic review highlights important evidence gaps, such as the lack of existing systematic reviews focused on patients with socioeconomic risk factors, and the need for further research.


Subject(s)
Length of Stay , Patient Discharge , Risk Assessment/methods , Age Factors , Aged , Case Management , Critical Pathways , Geriatric Assessment , Heart Failure/therapy , Hospitalists , Humans , Patient Care Team , Socioeconomic Factors , Telemedicine , United States , Vulnerable Populations
9.
Tech Innov Gastrointest Endosc ; 23(3): 226-233, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34458878

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Increasing demand for inpatient endoscopic services results in performing more non-emergent endoscopic cases after-hours, which poses risks to patient safety and negatively impacts patient and provider satisfaction. This study sought to quantify the existing state using quality improvement (QI) methodology, design targeted interventions, and determine their effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted an existing state evaluation through a process map, time-series study, and caseload analysis from 7/2017-12/2018. Using end-of-workday (EOW) as a proxy for patient/provider dissatisfaction and risk for patient safety events, we performed a prospective evaluation of a staged interdisciplinary multimodal intervention aimed to decrease the proportion of days with EOW after 7PM, decrease the proportion of cases begun after 5PM, and decrease EOW variability. The post-intervention period was 6/2019-2/2020. RESULTS: Based on existing state analyses, we implemented a series of targeted interventions: (1) provider workflow tips, (2) expedited transport for select patients, (3) pathway to reschedule appropriate cases to outpatient endoscopy, and (4) increased staffing for high caseload days through resource pooling. The proportion of days with EOW after 7PM decreased from 42.4% to 29.3% (caseload-adjusted odds ratio of 0.39, p< 0.001). Despite increased caseload, cases begun after 5PM decreased from 17.5% to 14.2% (OR 0.75, p = 0.009). EOW SD decreased from 2:20 hours to 1:36 hours. CONCLUSIONS: The multimodal intervention reduced days with EOW after 7PM and the proportion of cases begun after 5PM, despite increased caseload. This study shows how applying research methods to implement QI interventions successfully decreases late inpatient endoscopic cases.

10.
World J Gastroenterol ; 27(25): 3877-3887, 2021 Jul 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34321851

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are at increased risk for recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and repeat endoscopic procedures. We assessed the frequency of endoscopy for GIB in patients with LVADs and the impact of endoscopic intervention on preventing a subsequent GIB. AIM: To evaluate for an association between endoscopic intervention and subsequent GIB. Secondary aims were to assess the frequency of GIB in our cohort, describe GIB presentations and sources identified, and determine risk factors for recurrent GIB. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all patients at a large academic institution who underwent LVAD implantation from January 2011 - December 2018 and assessed all hospital encounters for GIB through December 2019. We performed a descriptive analysis of the GIB burden and the outcome of endoscopic procedures performed. We performed multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the association between endoscopic intervention and subsequent GIB. RESULTS: In the cohort of 295 patients, 97 (32.9%) had at least one GIB hospital encounter. There were 238 hospital encounters, with 55.4% (132/238) within the first year of LVAD implantation. GIB resolved on its own by discharge in 69.8% (164/235) encounters. Recurrent GIB occurred in 55.5% (54/97) of patients, accounting for 59.2% (141/238) of all encounters. Of the 85.7% (204/238) of encounters that included at least one endoscopic evaluation, an endoscopic intervention was performed in 34.8% (71/204). The adjusted odds ratio for subsequent GIB if an endoscopic intervention was performed during a GIB encounter was not significant (odds ratio 1.18, P = 0.58). CONCLUSION: Patients implanted with LVADs whom experience recurrent GIB frequently undergo repeat admissions and endoscopic procedures. In this retrospective cohort study, adherence to endoscopic guidelines for performing endoscopic interventions did not significantly decrease the odds of subsequent GIB, thus suggesting the uniqueness of the LVAD population. A prospective study is needed to identify patients with LVAD at risk of recurrent GIB and determine more effective management strategies.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Heart-Assist Devices , Endoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/therapy , Heart-Assist Devices/adverse effects , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
12.
Dig Dis Sci ; 66(10): 3307-3311, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33073333

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted numerous facets of healthcare workers' lives. There have also been significant changes in Gastroenterology (GI) fellowship training as a result of the challenges presented by the pandemic. AIMS: We conducted a national survey of Gastroenterology fellows to evaluate fellows' perceptions, changes in clinical duties, and education during the pandemic. METHODS: A survey was sent to Gastroenterology (GI) fellows in the USA. Information regarding redeployment, fellow restriction in endoscopy, outpatient clinics and inpatient consults, impact on educational activities, and available wellness resources was obtained. Fellows' level of agreement with adjustments to clinical duties was also assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-seven Gastroenterology fellows responded, and 29.4% were redeployed to non-GI services during the pandemic. COVID-19 impacted all aspects of GI fellowship training in the USA (endoscopy, outpatient clinics, inpatient consults, educational activities). Fellows' level of agreement in changes to various aspects of fellowship varied. 72.5% of respondents reported that their programs provided them with increased wellness resources to cope with the additional stress during the pandemic. For respondents with children, 17.6% reported no support with childcare. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted GI fellowship training in the USA in multiple domains, including gastrointestinal endoscopy, inpatient consults, outpatient clinics, and educational conferences. Our study highlights the importance of considering and incorporating fellows' viewpoints, as changes are made in response to the ongoing pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Gastroenterologists/statistics & numerical data , Gastroenterology/education , Adult , Fellowships and Scholarships/statistics & numerical data , Female , Gastroenterology/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires
14.
J Genet Couns ; 29(4): 616-624, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32227561

ABSTRACT

Cancer risk assessment services are important for patient care; effective use requires appropriate provider referral, accurate scheduling processes, and completed attendance at booked appointments. Sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with gastrointestinal cancer (GIC)-specific risk assessment appointments remain unstudied; therefore, we aimed to identify factors associated with appointment completion in a GIC risk assessment program at a tertiary academic center. Retrospective chart review was conducted on all patients scheduled for an appointment in the Gastrointestinal Cancer Risk Evaluation Program (GI-CREP) between January 2016 and December 2017. Data collected included demographic and clinical factors. Chi-square and Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests compared variables among patients based on the study outcome of whether a GI-CREP appointment was completed; marginal standardization was used to predict the standardized percentage of patients that had appointment completion. A total of 676 patients had a scheduled GI-CREP appointment; 32 individuals were excluded due to incomplete information or scheduling error, resulting in 644 patients available for final analysis. Our study population was predominantly female (61%), White (77%), and married (64%), had private healthcare insurance (76%), and lacked a personal history of cancer (60%). Referrals internal to the healthcare system were most common (77%), with gastroenterologists as the most frequent referring provider (42%). Seventy-five percent of scheduled individuals had appointment completion, while 25% of individuals did not. Independent predictors for an incomplete GI-CREP appointment included Medicaid insurance (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.21-4.28, p = .01), self-identified Black race (OR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.20-3.25, p = .008), and personal history of cancer (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.11-2.31, p = .01). These data highlight existing disparities in GIC risk assessment appointment completion associated with race, health insurance coverage, and medical status. Further studies of these areas are necessary to ensure equitable access to important GIC risk assessment services.


Subject(s)
Appointments and Schedules , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Female , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Male , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , United States
16.
Gastroenterology ; 158(5): 1465-1496.e17, 2020 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31945351

ABSTRACT

A subset of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) present with, or progress to, moderate to severe disease activity. These patients are at high risk for colectomy, hospitalization, corticosteroid dependence, and serious infections. The risk of life-threatening complications and emergency colectomy is particularly high among those patients hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis. Optimal management of outpatients or inpatients with moderate to severe UC often requires the use of immunomodulator and/or biologic therapies, including thiopurines, methotrexate, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, TNF-α antagonists, vedolizumab, tofacitnib, or ustekinumab, either as monotherapy or in combination (with immunomodulators), to mitigate these risks. Decisions about optimal drug therapy in moderate to severe UC are complex, with limited guidance on comparative efficacy and safety of different treatments, leading to considerable practice variability. Therefore, the American Gastroenterological Association prioritized development of clinical guidelines on this topic. To inform the clinical guidelines, this technical review was completed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Focused questions in adult outpatients with moderate to severe UC included: (1) overall and comparative efficacy of different medications for induction and maintenance of remission in patients with or without prior exposure to TNF-α antagonists, (2) comparative efficacy and safety of biologic monotherapy vs combination therapy with immunomodulators, (3) comparative efficacy of top-down (upfront use of biologics and/or immunomodulator therapy) vs step-up therapy (acceleration to biologic and/or immunomodulator therapy only after failure of 5-aminosalicylates, and (4) role of continuing vs stopping 5-aminosalicylates in patients being treated with immunomodulator and/or biologic therapy for moderate to severe UC. Focused questions in adults hospitalized with acute severe ulcerative colitis included: (5) overall and comparative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions for inpatients refractory to corticosteroids, in reducing risk of colectomy, (6) optimal dosing regimens for intravenous corticosteroids and infliximab in these patients, and (7) role of adjunctive antibiotics in the absence of confirmed infections.


Subject(s)
Colectomy/standards , Colitis, Ulcerative/therapy , Gastroenterology/standards , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Adult , Ambulatory Care/methods , Ambulatory Care/standards , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Biological Factors/therapeutic use , Colitis, Ulcerative/diagnosis , Colitis, Ulcerative/immunology , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Drug Therapy, Combination/standards , Gastroenterology/methods , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Hospitalization , Humans , Severity of Illness Index , Societies, Medical/standards , Treatment Outcome , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...