At-home hemoglobin A1c testing during COVID-19 improved glycemic control.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has exacerbated barriers to routine testing for chronic disease management. This study investigates whether a home hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) test kit intervention increases frequency of HbA1c testing and leads to changes in HbA1c 6 months post testing and whether self-reinforcement education improves maintenance of HbA1c testing. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a randomized, controlled quality improvement intervention among members with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a large commercial health plan. METHODS: Participants were 41,214 commercial fully insured members with T2D without an HbA1c test in the past 6 months or with only 1 HbA1c test in the last 12 months. Members were randomly assigned to either a control group or an at-home HbA1c testing intervention group consisting of either an opt-in test or a direct-to-member opt-out HbA1c test kit shipment. A third cohort of members was assigned to a self-reinforcement group to encourage continued testing twice per year. Main outcomes were HbA1c testing rates and HbA1c levels (in %). RESULTS: A total of 11.1% (508 of 4590) at-home HbA1c kits were completed. At-home HbA1c test kits increased testing rates by 4.9% compared with controls (P < .001). Members with an HbA1c level of at least 7% who requested and completed at-home HbA1c testing had a 0.38% reduction in HbA1c in the 6 months post intervention when controlling for baseline HbA1c (P < .001). Members who received self-reinforcement messaging had a 0.37% HbA1c reduction post intervention (P = .015). CONCLUSIONS: This novel, at-home approach to test HbA1c is an effective intervention to increase testing rates and facilitate HbA1c reduction over time in patients with T2D.

Development of a Pipeline for Removing Allergy Labels in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Penicillin allergy is reported by 10% to 20 % of patients, but when evaluated only 1% to 2% may have a true allergy. Patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) have a high likelihood of requiring beta-lactam antibiotics due to increased infection risk, which can be limited by a penicillin allergy label. When a penicillin allergy is recorded, alternatives are needed, including more expensive broader-spectrum antibiotics, with increases in drug-resistant bacteria, longer hospital stays, higher expenditures, and increases in nosocomial infections, such as Clostridium difficile colitis. This group of patients already undergoes extensive pretreatment testing and would especially benefit from allergy delabeling. This study aimed to develop a self-sustaining, low-cost pipeline between an HSCT clinic and an allergy clinic to identify and successfully delabel low-risk patients who endorse an allergy to penicillin, amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, piperacillin-tazobactam, or ampicillin before admission to the hospital. We developed a survey to triage allergy risk, identified key stakeholders in building the pipeline, and underwent 4 plan, do, study, act (PDSA) cycles. Changes were made in each of the PDSA cycles to minimize cost and uncompensated provider time, as well as to increase patient retention throughout the pipeline by increasing appointment availability and decreasing reliance on patients to independently progress through the pathway. Of the 410 patients with planned HSCT who were screened over 11 months, 89 (21.7%) were listed as having a penicillin and/or beta lactam allergy. All but 1 (66 of 67; 98.5%) of the participants completed the survey accurately when confirmed by an allergist, and the survey was 100% accurate in predicting delabeling success in low-risk patients. Of eligible patients, 43.8% (n = 39) were successfully delabeled before their transplant date, and 97.4% of these (n = 38) have undergone HSCT to date. This pipeline is maintained by approximately 5 hours of work per week (1 hour of allergy physician time, 4 hours of nurse and/or clinical coordinator time), with no other direct costs. There is an estimated direct savings of at least $1914.93 per patient delabeled. We successfully designed and implemented a pipeline between the HSCT clinic and the allergy clinic as a quality improvement initiative to identify and address high rates of reported beta-lactam allergies. We identified and addressed patient-based factors, logistical, temporal, and financial barriers that impacted patient retention and sustainability. This model is expected to yield significant and sustained cost savings for the healthcare system as well as to improve patient outcomes, and this hypothesis is currently undergoing formal analysis. We anticipate that this model can be used to create a similar pipeline in other healthcare systems for HSCT recipients, as well as patients in other clinical settings, such as oncology and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy.

How Likes and Retweets Impacted Our Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The growing dependence on social media for health-related information boomed during the COVID-19 pandemic, posing unprecedented challenges in navigating the vast amounts of information available right at our fingertips. Social media had a major impact on clinical decision-making affecting individuals, communities, and societies at large. In this review, we discuss the role of social media in amplifying information and misinformation as well as factors contributing to its reliance and prevalence. We review how medical providers have been impacted by this changing landscape, useful communication strategies to employ with in-office patient encounters, and how we can be active players in using social media as a tool for health promotion, correcting misinformation, and preparing for future pandemics.

Heterogeneity of Drug Allergies and Reaction Lists in Two U.S. Health Care Systems' Electronic Health Records.

BACKGROUND: Health care institutions have their own "picklist" for clinicians to document adverse drug reactions (ADRs) into the electronic health record (EHR) allergy list. Whether the lack of a nationally standardized picklist impacts clinician data entries is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of defined reaction picklists on clinical documentation and, therefore, downstream analytics and clinical research using these data at two institutions. METHODS: ADR data were obtained from the EHRs of patients who visited the emergency department or outpatient clinics at Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) and University of Colorado Hospital (UCH) from 2013 to 2018. Reported drug class ADR prevalences were calculated. We investigated the reactions on each picklist and compared the top 40 reactions at each institution, as well as the top 10 reactions within each drug class. RESULTS: Of 2,160,116 patients, 640,444 (30%) had 928,973 active drug allergies. The most commonly reported drug class allergens were similar between BWH and UCH. BWH's picklist had 48 reactions, and UCH's had 160 reactions; 29 reactions were shared by both picklists. While the top four reactions overall (rash, GI upset/nausea/vomiting, hives, itching) were identical between sites, reactions by drug class exhibited greater documentation diversity. For example, while the summed prevalence of swelling-related reactions to angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors was comparable across sites, swelling was represented by two terms ("swelling," "angioedema") at BWH but 11 terms at UCH (e.g., "swelling," "edema," by body locality). CONCLUSION: The availability and granularity of reaction picklists impact ADR documentation in the EHR by health care providers; picklists may partially explain variations in reported ADRs across health care systems.

Allergy Safety Events in Health Care: Development and Application of a Classification Schema Based on Retrospective Review.

BACKGROUND: Allergy safety requires understanding the operational processes that expose patients to their known allergens, including how and when such processes fail. OBJECTIVE: To improve health care safety for patients with allergies, we developed and assessed an allergy safety event classification schema to describe failures resulting in allergy-related safety events. METHODS: Using keyword searches followed by expert manual review of 299,031 voluntarily-filed safety event reports at 2 large academic medical centers, we identified and classified allergy-related safety events from 5 years of safety reports. We used driver diagrams to elucidate root causes for commonly observed allergy safety events in health care settings. RESULTS: From 299,031 safety reports, 1922 (0.6%) were extracted with keywords and 744 (0.2%) were manually confirmed as allergy-related safety events. Safety failures were due to incomplete/inaccurate electronic health record documentation (n = 375, 50.4%), human factors (n = 175, 23.5%), allergy alert limitation and/or malfunction (n = 127, 17.1%), data exchange and interoperability failures (n = 92, 12.4%), and electronic health record system default options (n = 30, 4.0%). Safety failures resulted in known allergen exposures to drugs (n = 537), including heparin (n = 27) and topical anesthetics such as lidocaine (n = 8); latex (n = 114); food allergens (n = 73); and adhesive (n = 23). CONCLUSIONS: We identified 744 allergy-related safety events to inform a novel safety failure classification schema as an important step toward a safer health care environment for patients with allergies. Improved systems are required to address safety issues with certain food and drug allergens.

Patient Experience Scores for Radiologists: Comparison With Nonradiologist Physicians and Changes After Public Posting in an Institutional Online Provider Directory.

BACKGROUND. Patients are increasingly using online information regarding patient experiences to guide care decisions. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare patient experience scores between radiologists and nonradiologist physicians and to assess changes in scores after their public posting in an online physician directory. METHODS. This retrospective study included data collected from May 1, 2017, to November 30, 2018, at a single large academic medical center. After all institutional outpatient visits, patients were e-mailed the Press Ganey Medical Practice Survey, which included 10 questions (answered using a Likert scale and converted to 100-point range) relating to the patient's experience with the specific provider for the encounter. Surveys were distributed to patients after radiology encounters if involving an image-guided invasive procedure. Mean scores for each question and the mean weighted overall score were displayed on each physician's publicly available profile on the hospital's online physician directory and were updated monthly. Scores were compared between radiologists and nonradiologist physicians; temporal changes were assessed. RESULTS. The response rate was 18.0% (96,057/533,983). After exclusions (23,989 surveys completed without provider ratings; 183 surveys evaluating physician assistants), 71,885 physician surveys were evaluated: 2703 surveys for 65 radiologists, 49,403 surveys for 916 physicians in 17 nonsurgical specialties, and 19,779 surveys for 262 physicians in 13 surgical specialties. Over the study period, the mean overall score was 95.6 for radiologists and 95.9 for nonradiologists (94.6 for surgical specialties, 96.4 for nonsurgical specialties). For the 10 individual questions, scores ranged for radiologists from 94.6 (time spent with patient) to 96.8 (friendliness/courtesy) and for nonradiologists from 94.6 (time spent with patient) to 97.0 (friendliness/courtesy). The mean overall score increased from the first month to the final month for radiologists from 94.2 to 97.1 and for nonradiologists from 95.7 to 96.3. For radiologists, the largest improvement was for instructions regarding postprocedure follow-up care (increased from 91.4 to 97.4). CONCLUSION. Radiologists received high scores on patient experience surveys when evaluated on encounters involving invasive procedures, achieving scores similar to those for other physicians. Scores improved over time, possibly related to online posting of survey results. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings support the utility of implementing patient experience surveys in radiology.

Ambulatory Virtual Care During a Pandemic: Patient Safety Considerations.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted sudden and fundamental changes in health care, including a rapid rise in the utilization of telehealth services in the ambulatory setting. With the unprecedented and significant decline in traditional office-based visits and procedures, novel patient safety risks and challenges emerged. METHODS: The ambulatory practices at our quaternary care, academic medical center experienced a 200-fold increase in virtual visit volume between February and April 2020. We convened a multidisciplinary working group dedicated to evaluating quality and safety when providing virtual visits during a pandemic. Our primary outcome was patient experience with virtual care delivery, which was assessed by leveraging patient complaint data and patient satisfaction survey data. RESULTS: For our main focus of patient experience and satisfaction, survey data were analyzed from the approximately 76,616 virtual visit encounters that occurred between March 1, 2020, and April 21, 2020. During this period, 5 patient complaints were filed to the Patient Advocacy Department. Overall, patient satisfaction with telehealth remained stable and high at >93% from February to May 2020. As we assessed these data each month, our working group developed risk mitigation strategies in response to the novel challenges presented by the use of telemedicine due to the COVID-19 pandemic while working to maintain patient satisfaction with care. We identified quality and safety issues around patient factors including optimal triage of patients and use of technology. We also evaluated accessibility to virtual platforms and logistics such as coordination of care for diagnostic testing. Finally, a guidance document was created and communicated to our diverse ambulatory practices to support clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory virtual care delivery requires a dynamic, flexible model of care through continuous rapid-cycle process improvement to mitigate patient safety risks during a pandemic, incorporating both provider and patient perspectives.

Improving Allergy Documentation: A Retrospective Electronic Health Record System-Wide Patient Safety Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: Documentation of allergies in a coded, non-free-text format in the electronic health record (EHR) triggers clinical decision support to prevent adverse events. Health system-wide patient safety initiatives to improve EHR allergy documentation by specifically decreasing free-text allergy entries have not been reported. The goal of this initiative was to systematically reduce free-text allergen entries in the EHR allergy module. METHODS: We assessed free-text allergy entries in a commercial EHR used at a multihospital integrated health care system in the greater Boston area. Using both manual and automated methods, a multidisciplinary consensus group prioritized high-risk and frequently used free-text allergens for conversion to coded entries, added new allergen entries, and deleted duplicate allergen entries. Environmental allergies were moved to the patient problem list. RESULTS: We identified 242,330 free-text entries, which included a variety of environmental allergies (42%), food allergies (18%), contrast media allergies (13%), "no known allergy" (12%), drug allergies (2%), and "no contrast allergy" (2%). Most free-text entries were entered by medical assistants in ambulatory settings (34%) and registered nurses in perioperative settings (20%). We remediated a total of 52,206 free-text entries with automated methods and 79,578 free-text entries with manual methods. CONCLUSIONS: Through this multidisciplinary intervention, we identified and remediated 131,784 free-text entries in our EHR to improve clinical decision support and patient safety. Additional strategies are required to completely eliminate free-text allergy entry, and establish systematic, consistent, and safe guidelines for documenting allergies.

Symptom monitoring after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in a large integrated healthcare system: Separating symptoms from severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence of systemic overlap and typical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms in healthcare personnel (HCP) following COVID-19 vaccination and association of reported symptoms with diagnosis of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the context of public health recommendations regarding work exclusion. DESIGN: This prospective cohort study was conducted between December 16, 2020, and March 14, 2021, with HCP who had received at least 1 dose of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. SETTING: Large healthcare system in New England. INTERVENTIONS: HCP were prompted to complete a symptom survey for 3 days after each vaccination. Reported symptoms generated automated guidance regarding symptom management, SARS-CoV-2 testing requirements, and work restrictions. Overlap symptoms (ie, fever, fatigue, myalgias, arthralgias, or headache) were categorized as either lower or higher severity. Typical COVID-19 symptoms included sore throat, cough, nasal congestion or rhinorrhea, shortness of breath, ageusia and anosmia. RESULTS: Among 64,187 HCP, a postvaccination electronic survey had response rates of 83% after dose 1 and 77% after dose 2. Report of ≥3 lower-severity overlap symptoms, ≥1 higher-severity overlap symptoms, or at least 1 typical COVID-19 symptom after dose 1 was associated with increased likelihood of testing positive. HCP with prior COVID-19 infection were significantly more likely to report severe overlap symptoms after dose 1. CONCLUSIONS: Reported overlap symptoms were common; however, only report of ≥3 low-severity overlap symptoms, at least 1 higher-severity overlap symptom, or any typical COVID-19 symptom were associated with infection. Work-related restrictions for overlap symptoms should be reconsidered.

Association of Self-reported High-Risk Allergy History With Allergy Symptoms After COVID-19 Vaccination.

Importance: Allergic history in individuals with confirmed anaphylaxis to a messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine is common. However, the risk factors for allergy symptoms after receiving the vaccine are unknown. Objective: To assess the association between self-reported history of high-risk allergy and self-reported allergic reactions after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination of health care employees. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study obtained demographic, medical, and vaccine administration data of employees of Mass General Brigham from the institutional electronic health record. Employees who received at least 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine between December 14, 2020, and February 1, 2021, and who completed at least 1 postvaccination symptom survey in the 3 days after vaccination were included. Exposures: Self-reported history of high-risk allergy, defined as a previous severe allergic reaction to a vaccine, an injectable medication, or other allergen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 1 or more self-reported allergic reactions in the first 3 days after dose 1 or dose 2 of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Multivariable log binomial regression was used to assess the association between allergic reactions and high-risk allergy status. Results: A total of 52 998 health care employees (mean [SD] age, 42 [14] years; 38 167 women [72.0%]) were included in the cohort, of whom 51 706 (97.6%) received 2 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and 474 (0.9%) reported a history of high-risk allergy. Individuals with vs without a history of high-risk allergy reported more allergic reactions after receiving dose 1 or 2 of the vaccine (11.6% [n = 55] vs 4.7% [n = 2461]). In the adjusted model, a history of high-risk allergy was associated with an increased risk of allergic reactions (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 2.46; 95% CI, 1.92-3.16), with risk being highest for hives (aRR, 3.81; 95% CI, 2.33-6.22) and angioedema (aRR, 4.36; 95% CI, 2.52-7.54). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that self-reported history of high-risk allergy was associated with an increased risk of self-reported allergic reactions within 3 days of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. However, reported allergy symptoms did not impede the completion of the 2-dose vaccine protocol among a cohort of eligible health care employees, supporting the overall safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

Contributors to Gender Differences in Burnout and Professional Fulfillment: A Survey of Physician Faculty.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to describe gender differences in physician burnout and professional fulfillment and to explore their potential contributors. METHODS: This was a single-center, cross-sectional survey study of physician faculty at Brigham and Women's Hospital, an academic medical center in Boston. The population included all physician faculty who practiced clinical medicine in 2017 (n = 2,388). The study was conducted using the Stanford Physician Wellness Survey. Burnout and professional fulfillment were the main outcome measures assessed. Other variables assessed included ratings of culture of wellness, personal resilience, and efficiency of practice factors associated with physician experience. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 1,066 faculty, of whom 46.4% were female and 59.8% were younger than 50. Female physicians reported significantly higher rates of burnout (42.4% vs. 34.4%, p = 0.01) and lower rates of professional fulfillment (35.1% vs. 50.4%, p < 0.01) than male physicians. Female physicians reported lower ratings for self-compassion and multiple culture of wellness factors. After adjusting for demographic factors and academic rank, the study team identified multiple culture of wellness factors (perceived appreciation, schedule control, work environment diversity and inclusion) and self-compassion as attenuating the significant relationship between gender and burnout. Only perceived appreciation attenuated the significant relationship between gender and professional fulfillment. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated higher rates of burnout and lower rates of professional fulfillment among female vs. male physician faculty. Culture of wellness factors and self-compassion may contribute to gender differences in burnout and professional fulfillment and potentially represent modifiable targets for efforts seeking to eliminate gender disparities in physicians' workplace experiences.

First-Dose mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Allergic Reactions: Limited Role for Excipient Skin Testing.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state that a severe or immediate allergic reaction to the first dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is a contraindication for the second dose. OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes associated with excipient skin testing after a reported allergic reaction to the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: We identified a consecutive sample of patients with reported allergic reactions after the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine who underwent allergy assessment with skin testing to polyethylene glycol (PEG) and, when appropriate, polysorbate 80. Skin testing results in conjunction with clinical phenotyping of the first-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine reaction guided second-dose vaccination recommendation. Second-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine reactions were assessed. RESULTS: Eighty patients with reported first-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine allergic reactions (n = 65; 81% immediate onset) underwent excipient skin testing. Of those, 14 (18%) had positive skin tests to PEG (n = 5) and/or polysorbate 80 (n = 12). Skin testing result did not affect tolerance of the second dose in patients with immediate or delayed reactions. Of the 70 patients who received the second mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose (88%), 62 had either no reaction or a mild reaction managed with antihistamines (89%), but 2 patients required epinephrine treatment. Three patients with positive PEG-3350 intradermal (methylprednisolone) testing tolerated second-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Refresh Tears caused nonspecific skin irritation. CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals with a reported allergic reaction to the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, regardless of skin test result, received the second dose safely. More data are needed on the value of skin prick testing to PEG (MiraLAX) in evaluating patients with mRNA COVID-19 vaccine anaphylaxis. Refresh Tears should not be used for skin testing.

The Importance of a Timely Second Dose of the 2021 COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Depends on the Protection Afforded by a First Dose and Subsequent Risk of Anaphylaxis.

Vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represents our greatest hope to combat the devastating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Amid ongoing global vaccination efforts, rare cases of severe allergic reactions to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have received significant attention. Although the exact nature of these reactions may be heterogeneous, various approaches exist to engage with patients, communities, public health departments, primary care providers, and other clinicians in a multidisciplinary approach to advance population health. Whereas it is optimal for patients to receive COVID-19 vaccination as outlined in emergency use authorizations, second-dose deferral of mRNA vaccines may be a consideration within a shared decision-making paradigm of care in select circumstances characterized by high durable first-vaccine-dose protection and significant elevations of vaccine anaphylaxis risk. Still, the durability of protection afforded by a single dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is uncertain, and alternative approaches to complete vaccination, including precautionary use of a COVID-19 viral vector vaccine, also remain patient-preference-sensitive options. There is an urgent need to define correlates of COVID-19 immunity and the level of longer-term protection afforded by COVID-19 vaccination.