Differential Use of Outpatient Palliative Care by Demographic and Clinical Characteristics.

CONTEXT: Little is known about equity in utilization of outpatient palliative care (PC). OBJECTIVES: To explore whether patient-level factors are associated with completing initial and follow-up visits among patients referred to outpatient PC. METHODS: Using electronic health record data, we generated a cohort of all adults referred to outpatient PC at University of California, San Francisco October 2017-October 2021. We assessed whether demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with completion of 1) an initial PC visit and 2) at least one follow-up visit. RESULTS: Of patients referred to outpatient PC (N = 6,871), 60% completed an initial visit; 66% of those who established care returned for follow-up. In multivariable models, patients who were less likely to complete an initial visit were older (OR per decade 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89-0.98), Black (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.56-0.90), Latinx (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.83), unpartnered (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.71-0.90), and had Medicaid (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69-0.97). Among patients who completed an initial visit, those less likely to complete a follow-up visit were older (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.94), male (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71-0.96), preferred a language other than English (0.71; 95% CI 0.54-0.95), and had a serious illness other than cancer (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.61-0.90). CONCLUSION: We found that Black and Latinx patients were less likely to complete an initial visit and those with a preferred language other than English were less likely to complete a follow-up visit. To promote equity in PC, these differences and their impact on outcomes must be explored.

Comparison of Diagnostic Recommendations from Individual Physicians versus the Collective Intelligence of Multiple Physicians in Ambulatory Cases Referred for Specialist Consultation.

BACKGROUND: Studies report higher diagnostic accuracy using the collective intelligence (CI) of multiple clinicians compared with individual clinicians. However, the diagnostic process is iterative, and unexplored is the value of CI in improving clinical recommendations leading to a final diagnosis. METHODS: To compare the appropriateness of diagnostic recommendations advised by individual physicians versus the CI of physicians, we entered actual consultation requests sent by primary care physicians to specialists onto a web-based CI platform capable of collecting diagnostic recommendations (next steps for care) from multiple physicians. We solicited responses to 35 cases (12 endocrinology, 13 gynecology, 10 neurology) from ≥3 physicians of any specialty through the CI platform, which aggregated responses into a CI output. The primary outcome was the appropriateness of individual physician recommendations versus the CI output recommendations, using recommendations agreed upon by 2 specialists in the same specialty as a gold standard. The secondary outcome was the recommendations' potential for harm. RESULTS: A total of 177 physicians responded. Cases had a median of 7 respondents (interquartile range: 5-10). Diagnostic recommendations in the CI output achieved higher levels of appropriateness (69%) than recommendations from individual physicians (45%; χ2 = 5.95, P = 0.015). Of the CI recommendations, 54% were potentially harmful, as compared with 41% of individuals' recommendations (χ2 = 2.49, P = 0.11). LIMITATIONS: Cases were from a single institution. CI was solicited using a single algorithm/platform. CONCLUSIONS: When seeking specialist guidance, diagnostic recommendations from the CI of multiple physicians are more appropriate than recommendations from most individual physicians, measured against specialist recommendations. Although CI provides useful recommendations, some have potential for harm. Future research should explore how to use CI to improve diagnosis while limiting harm from inappropriate tests/therapies.

The PREPARE for Your Care program increases advance care planning engagement among diverse older adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is low among older adults with cancer. In a secondary analysis of randomized trial data, the authors compared the efficacy of the PREPARE for Your Care (PREPARE) website plus an easy-to-read advance directive (AD) with an AD only among older adults with and without cancer. METHODS: Safety net, primary care patients in San Francisco were included if they were 55 years old or older, were English- or Spanish-speaking, and had 2 or more chronic conditions. The authors determined cancer diagnoses by using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision/Tenth Revision codes. The primary outcome was new ACP documentation in the medical record at 15 months; the secondary outcomes were self-reported ACP engagement, ease of use, satisfaction, and depression/anxiety. The authors used mixed effects logistic and linear regression adjusted for prior ACP, health literacy, and clinician, including a cancer interaction term. RESULTS: Of 986 participants, 220 (22%) had cancer. The mean age was 63 years (SD, 6 years), 61% were women, 81% were of a minority race/ethnicity, 45% were Spanish-speaking, 39% had limited health literacy, and 27% had prior ACP. New ACP documentation was higher in the PREPARE arm versus the AD-only arm among participants with cancer (62% vs 43%; P = .01) and without cancer (38% vs 28%; P = .01), as was ACP engagement in both arms (P < .001), with no interactions by cancer. Ease of use and satisfaction were high, and depression/anxiety was low, with no differences by study arm or by cancer/no cancer. CONCLUSIONS: PREPARE plus an easy-to-read AD increased ACP documentation and engagement among diverse older adults with cancer more than an AD alone, with no increase in depression or anxiety between study arms or by cancer. PREPARE may help to decrease ACP disparities among patients with cancer. LAY SUMMARY: Advance care planning (ACP) is the process of sharing values, goals, and preferences for medical care, but engagement in ACP is low among older adults with cancer. Among 986 English- and Spanish-speaking older adults from a safety net hospital, an interactive, multimedia, web-based ACP program (PREPARE for Your Care at https://prepareforyourcare.org/) plus an easy-to-read advance directive increased ACP documentation and engagement more than an advance directive alone. There were no differences in this increase in ACP between older adults with cancer and older adults without cancer. Also, engaging in ACP did not result in increased depression or anxiety.

A Toolkit for Community-Based, Medicaid-Funded Case Managers to Introduce Advance Care Planning to Frail, Older Adults: A Pilot Study.

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) among frail, older adults receiving in-home care is low. Leveraging case managers to introduce ACP may increase engagement. Objective: Pilot an ACP-Toolkit for case managers and their clients. Design: Feasibility pilot of an ACP-Toolkit for case managers to introduce ACP and the PREPAREforYourCare.org website and advance directives. Setting/Subjects: Case managers from four local aging service organizations who referred English-speaking clients ≥55 years old. Measurements: Using validated surveys (five-point Likert scales), we assessed changes in case managers' attitudes, confidence, and readiness to facilitate ACP and clients' readiness to engage in ACP from baseline to follow-up (one-week) using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Results: We enrolled 9 case managers and 12 clients (median age 69 [standard deviation 8], 75% minority race/ethnicity). At follow-up, case managers' confidence increased (3.2 [0.7] to 4.2 [0.7]; p = 0.02), and clients' readiness increased (2.8 [1.5] to 3.4 [1.4]; p = 0.06). All case managers agreed the Toolkit was easy to use, helped start ACP conversations, and would recommend it to others. All clients found the Toolkit easy to understand and were comfortable with case managers using it. Nearly all clients (92%) would recommend it to others. Suggestions for improvement included offering the Toolkit in other languages and disseminating it in clinical and community settings. Conclusions: The ACP-Toolkit resulted in higher case manager confidence in facilitating ACP and client readiness to engage in ACP, and usability was high. A brief ACP-Toolkit may be a feasible solution to increase ACP engagement among frail, older adults receiving in-home care.

Patient-Reported Use of the After Visit Summary in a Primary Care Internal Medicine Practice.

Participants completed a cross-sectional survey about their use of the after visit summary (AVS) at a previous primary care visit. Of 355 participants, 294 (82.8%) recalled receiving it, 67.4% consulted it, 45.9% consulted it more than once, and 31.6% shared the AVS. In multivariable analysis, higher education and older age were associated with AVS consultation. Among the subset of 133 patients recalling personalized free-text instructions, 96% found them easy to understand and 94.4% found them useful. Our findings suggest that the AVS is a useful communication tool and improvement efforts should emphasize clarity for those most vulnerable to communication errors.

Resident Physician Experiences With and Responses to Biased Patients.

Importance: Biased patient behavior negatively impacts resident well-being. Data on the prevalence and frequency of these encounters are lacking and are needed to guide the creation of institutional trainings and policies to support trainees. Objective: To evaluate the frequency of resident experiences with and responses to a range of biased patient behaviors. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective survey was sent via email to 331 second- and third-year internal medicine residents from 3 academic medical centers in California and North Carolina. First-year residents were excluded owing to their limited interactions with patients at the time of participant recruitment. Data were collected from August 21 to November 25, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Descriptive statistics were used to report the frequency of experience of various types of biased patient behavior, residents' responses, the factors impeding residents' responses, and residents' experiences and beliefs regarding training and policies. Results: Overall, 232 of 331 residents (70%) participated; 116 (50%) were women; 116 of 247 (47%) were White (participants had the option of selecting >1 race/ethnicity); and 23 (10%) identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer. The frequency of resident-reported experience of types of biased patient behaviors varied. The most common behaviors-belittling comments and assumption of nonphysician status-were reported to be experienced 1 or more times per week by 14% of residents (32 of 231) and 17% of residents (38 of 230), respectively. Women, Black or Latinx, and Asian residents reported experiencing biased behavior more frequently. Forty-five percent of Black or Latinx residents (17 of 38) encountered instances of explicit epithets or rejection of care. All 70 Asian residents reported experiencing inquiries into their ethnic origins. Most women residents (110 of 115 [96%]) experienced role questioning behaviors, and 87% (100 of 115) experienced sexual harassment. The need to prioritize clinical care and a sense of futility in responding were the most common factors (cited by 34% of residents [76 of 227] and 25% of residents [56 of 227], respectively) significantly impeding responses to biased behaviors. Eighty-five percent of residents (191 of 226) never reported incidents to their institution. Eighty-nine percent of residents (206 of 232) identified training and policies as necessary or very necessary. Conclusions and Relevance: This survey study suggests that biased patient behavior is experienced frequently by internal medicine residents. Non-White and women residents reported experiencing a disproportionate burden of these incidents. Residents' responses rarely included institutional involvement. Residency programs and health care systems should prioritize training and policies to address biased patient behavior and support affected residents.

Use and Usefulness of After-Visit Summaries by Language and Health Literacy among Latinx and Chinese Primary Care Patients.

The after-visit summary (AVS), a document generated from the electronic health record that summarizes patients' encounters with the healthcare system, is a widely used communication tool. Its use by and usefulness for populations with limited English proficiency (LEP) and limited health literacy (LHL) is poorly understood. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed use and usefulness of the AVS among English-, Spanish-, Cantonese-, or Mandarin-speaking Latinx and Chinese primary-care patients. Outcome measures were self-reported AVS use (did not use/looked-at only/shared only/looked-at and shared) and usefulness (useful/not useful). Among 993 participants, 57% were ≥65 years old, 61% had LEP, 21% had LHL, 30.2% were Latinx, 69.8% were Chinese. The majority used the AVS (86%) and found it useful (65%). In adjusted models, participants with LEP were more likely to "look at" (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.07-2.62) and "look at and share" (OR 1.65, 1.02-2.66) the AVS, but less likely to find it useful (OR 0.68, 0.47-0.98) compared to English speakers. Those with LHL were less likely to "look at" (OR 0.60, 0.39-0.93) and less likely to find the AVS useful (OR 0.67, 0.46-0.99) compared to those with adequate health literacy. Our results emphasize the need for easy-to-understand and fully language-concordant AVS.

Patient characteristics associated with objective measures of digital health tool use in the United States: A literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to determine which patient characteristics are associated with the use of patient-facing digital health tools in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a literature review of studies of patient-facing digital health tools that objectively evaluated use (eg, system/platform data representing frequency of use) by patient characteristics (eg, age, race or ethnicity, income, digital literacy). We included any type of patient-facing digital health tool except patient portals. We reran results using the subset of studies identified as having robust methodology to detect differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: We included 29 studies; 13 had robust methodology. Most studies examined smartphone apps and text messaging programs for chronic disease management and evaluated only 1-3 patient characteristics, primarily age and gender. Overall, the majority of studies found no association between patient characteristics and use. Among the subset with robust methodology, white race and poor health status appeared to be associated with higher use. DISCUSSION: Given the substantial investment in digital health tools, it is surprising how little is known about the types of patients who use them. Strategies that engage diverse populations in digital health tool use appear to be needed. CONCLUSION: Few studies evaluate objective measures of digital health tool use by patient characteristics, and those that do include a narrow range of characteristics. Evidence suggests that resources and need drive use.

Assessing Mobile Phone Digital Literacy and Engagement in User-Centered Design in a Diverse, Safety-Net Population: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Health care systems are rapidly deploying digital tools for disease management; however, few studies have evaluated their usability by vulnerable populations. To understand the barriers to app usage among vulnerable populations, we employed user-centered design (UCD) methods in the development of a new text messaging app. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to describe variations in patients' engagement in the app design process, focusing on limited health literacy (LHL), limited English proficiency (LEP), and limited digital literacy (LDL). METHODS: We conducted 20 in-depth semistructured interviews with primary care patients at a public health care system, used open-ended discussions and card sorting tasks to seek input about mobile phones and text messaging, and used open coding to categorize the patterns of mobile phone usage and to evaluate engagement in the card sorting process. We examined qualitative differences in engagement by examining the extensiveness of participant feedback on existing and novel text messaging content and calculated the proportion of patients providing extensive feedback on existing and novel content, overall and by health literacy, English proficiency, and digital literacy. RESULTS: The average age of the 20 participants was 59 (SD 8) years; 13 (65%) were female, 18 (90%) were nonwhite, 16 (80%) had LHL, and 13 (65%) had LEP. All had depression, and 14 (70%) had diabetes. Most participants had smartphones (18/20, 90%) and regularly used text messaging (15/20, 75%), but 14 (70%) of them reported having difficulty texting because of inability to type, physical disability, and low literacy. We identified 10 participants as specifically having LDL; 7 of these participants had LEP, and all 10 had LHL. Half of the participants required a modification of the card sorting activity owing to not understanding it or not being able to read the cards in the allotted time. The proportion of participants who gave extensive feedback on existing content was lower in participants with limited versus adequate English proficiency (4/13, 30% vs 5/7, 71%), limited versus adequate health literacy (7/16, 44% vs 3/4, 75%), and limited versus adequate digital literacy (4/10, 40% vs 6/10, 60%); none of these differences were statistically significant. When examining the proportion of patients who gave extensive feedback for novel messaging content, those with LHL were less engaged than those with adequate health literacy (8/16, 50% vs 4/4, 100%); there were no statistical differences by any subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread mobile phone use, digital literacy barriers are common among vulnerable populations. Engagement in the card sorting activity varied among participants and appeared to be lower among those with LHL, LEP, and LDL. Researchers employing traditional UCD methods should routinely measure these communication domains among their end-user samples. Future work is needed to replicate our findings in larger samples, but augmentation of card sorting with direct observation and audiovisual cues may be more productive in eliciting feedback for those with communication barriers.

Health Literacy Matters More Than Experience for Advance Care Planning Knowledge Among Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) engagement is low among vulnerable populations, including those with limited health literacy (LHL). Limited knowledge about ACP may be a modifiable mediator of the relationship between LHL and ACP. Our goal was to determine whether health literacy is associated with ACP knowledge. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTING: A public health delivery system and Veterans Affairs Medical Center in San Francisco, CA. PARTICIPANTS: English- and Spanish-speaking patients (N = 1400). MEASUREMENTS: ACP knowledge was assessed with seven validated multiple-choice questions. Health literacy was measured using a validated scale. Sociodemographic measures included age, sex, language, education, race, health status, and social support. Prior ACP experience was defined as having documented legal forms and/or goals-of-care discussions in the medical record. We used Kruskal-Wallis tests and linear regression to examine associations of ACP knowledge with LHL, prior ACP experience, and sociodemographic factors. RESULTS: Mean age of participants was 65 (±10) years, 48% were women, 34% had LHL, 32% were Spanish speaking, 47% had high school education or less, and 70% were nonwhite. Mean 7-point knowledge scores were lower for those with limited vs adequate health literacy (3.8 [SD = 1.9 vs 5.5 (SD = 1.7); P < .001). In multivariable analysis, ACP knowledge scores were 1.0 point lower among those with LHL; 0.6 points lower among Spanish speakers and those with high school education or less; and 0.5 points lower among individuals of nonwhite race (P < .001 for all). Knowledge scores were 0.02 points lower per year of older age (P = .007) and 0.01 points higher per point of greater social support (P = .005). Prior ACP experience was not associated with knowledge after adjustment (P = .7). CONCLUSIONS: Health literacy and sociodemographics are stronger predictors than prior ACP experience of ACP knowledge. This study suggests that providing easy-to-understand ACP materials is paramount and should be offered even if patients have previous experience with the ACP process. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2151-2156, 2019.

Health Coaching Has Differential Effects on Veterans with Limited Health Literacy and Numeracy: a Secondary Analysis of ACTIVATE.

BACKGROUND: Health coaching is an effective behavior change strategy. Understanding if there is a differential impact of health coaching on patients with low health literacy has not been well investigated. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a telephone coaching intervention would result in similar improvements in enrollment in prevention programs and patient activation among Veterans with low versus high health literacy (specifically, reading literacy and numeracy). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred seventeen Veterans with at least one modifiable risk factor: current smoker, BMI ≥ 30, or < 150 min of moderate physical activity weekly. METHODS: A single-item assessment of health literacy and a subjective numeracy scale were assessed at baseline. A logistic regression and general linear longitudinal models were used to examine the differential impact of the intervention compared to control on enrollment in prevention programs and changes in patient activation measures (PAM) scores among patients with low versus high health literacy. RESULTS: The coaching intervention resulted in higher enrollment in prevention programs and improvements in PAM scores compared to usual care regardless of baseline health literacy. The coaching intervention had a greater effect on the probability of enrollment in prevention programs for patients with low numeracy (intervention vs control difference of 0.31, 95% CI 0.18, 0.45) as compared to those with high numeracy (0.13, 95% CI - 0.01, 0.27); the low compared to high differential effect was clinically, but not statistically significant (0.18, 95% CI - 0.01, 0.38; p = 0.07). Among patients with high numeracy, the intervention group had greater increases in PAM as compared to the control group at 6 months (mean difference in improvement 4.8; 95% CI 1.7, 7.9; p = 0.003). This led to a clinically and statistically significant differential intervention effect for low vs high numeracy (- 4.6; 95% CI - 9.1, - 0.15; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that health coaching may be particularly beneficial in behavior change strategies in populations with low numeracy when interpretation of health risk information is part of the intervention. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01828567.

Engaging users in the design of an mHealth, text message-based intervention to increase physical activity at a safety-net health care system.

OBJECTIVES: Text-messaging interventions are a promising approach to increasing physical activity in vulnerable populations. To better inform the development of a text-messaging intervention, we sought to identify barriers and facilitators to using text messaging and engaging in physical activity among patients with diabetes and comorbid depression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted interviews with primary care patients at a safety-net health care system (N = 26). Data were collected at 3 stages, including a focus group (stage 1), and individual interviews (stage 2 and 3). Patients in stage 1 and 2 previously participated in a text-messaging intervention as part of depression treatment. Discussions focused on participant experience of previously using a text-messaging intervention, influences and perceptions of physical activity, and mobile phone use. We analyzed all transcripts for emerging themes. RESULTS: Participants were 56.2 years (±9.7); 69.2% were female, 65.4% identified as Hispanic/Latino(a), and 46.2% reported having less than a high school education. All had depression and 61.5% had diabetes. Specific barriers that emerged included low literacy and only basic use of mobile phones in everyday life, in combination with a high prevalence of comorbid health conditions and limited mobility. These were each addressed with a specific content or intervention delivery change in the overall intervention design. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting a focus group and individual interviews with end users of an mHealth intervention under development has implications for tailoring and modifying components of the content and format to ensure that the final intervention will engage end users most effectively.

Health literacy in the "oral exchange": an important element of patient-provider communication.

OBJECTIVE: Oral communication between health care providers and patients--the "oral exchange"--greatly impacts patient health outcomes; however, only recently have health literacy inquiries been incorporated into this field. This review examines the intersection between oral and aural literacy and the oral exchange. METHODS: A systematic literature search was carried out. Papers published in English since 2003 that specifically examine oral/aural literacy and oral patient-provider communication were included. RESULTS: The search yielded 999 articles, 12 of which were included in this review. Three tools have been developed to measure either patient or provider oral/aural literacy. There is a discrepancy between patient and provider oral/aural literacy levels, and high literacy demand is associated with reduced patient learning. Low patient oral/aural literacy is associated with poor health outcomes. Two interventions have been developed to reduce literacy demand. CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates the critical role of oral and aural literacy in the oral exchange, the importance of reducing literacy demand, and the need for future research in this field. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Recommendations include the use of plain language and teach-back by providers, as well as incorporation of awareness of oral and aural literacy into community programs and health care provider education and training.