Design and implementation of electronic health record-based tools to support a weight management program in primary care.

Objectives: This paper reports on a mixed methods formative evaluation to support the design and implementation of information technology (IT) tools for a primary care weight management intervention delivered through the patient portal using primary care staff as coaches. Methods: We performed a qualitative needs assessment, designed the IT tools to support the weight management program, and developed implementation tracking metrics. Implementation tracking metrics were designed to use real world electronic health record (EHR) data. Results: The needs assessment revealed IT requirements as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation of EHR-based weight management interventions in primary care. We developed implementation metrics for the IT tools. These metrics were used in weekly project team calls to make sure that project resources were allocated to areas of need. Conclusion: This study identifies the important role of IT in supporting weight management through patient identification, weight and activity tracking in the patient portal, and the use of the EHR as a population management tool. An intensive multi-level implementation approach is required for successful primary care-based weight management interventions including well-designed IT tools, comprehensive involvement of clinic leadership, and implementation tracking metrics to guide the process of workflow integration. This study helps to bridge the gap between informatics and implementation by using socio-technical formative evaluation methods early in order to support the implementation of IT tools. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04420936. Registered June 9, 2020.

Clinician perspectives on how situational context and augmented intelligence design features impact perceived usefulness of sepsis prediction scores embedded within a simulated electronic health record.

OBJECTIVE: Obtain clinicians' perspectives on early warning scores (EWS) use within context of clinical cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We developed cases mimicking sepsis situations. De-identified data, synthesized physician notes, and EWS representing deterioration risk were displayed in a simulated EHR for analysis. Twelve clinicians participated in semi-structured interviews to ascertain perspectives across four domains: (1) Familiarity with and understanding of artificial intelligence (AI), prediction models and risk scores; (2) Clinical reasoning processes; (3) Impression and response to EWS; and (4) Interface design. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using content and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis revealed clinicians have experience but limited AI and prediction/risk modeling understanding. Case assessments were primarily based on clinical data. EWS went unmentioned during initial case analysis; although when prompted to comment on it, they discussed it in subsequent cases. Clinicians were unsure how to interpret or apply the EWS, and desired evidence on its derivation and validation. Design recommendations centered around EWS display in multi-patient lists for triage, and EWS trends within the patient record. Themes included a "Trust but Verify" approach to AI and early warning information, dichotomy that EWS is helpful for triage yet has disproportional signal-to-high noise ratio, and action driven by clinical judgment, not the EWS. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians were unsure of how to apply EWS, acted on clinical data, desired score composition and validation information, and felt EWS was most useful when embedded in multi-patient views. Systems providing interactive visualization may facilitate EWS transparency and increase confidence in AI-generated information.

Implementing weight maintenance with existing staff and electronic health record tools in a primary care setting: Baseline results from the MAINTAIN PRIME trial.

BACKGROUND: There is need for interventions that can assist with long-term maintenance of healthy body weight and be sustainably integrated into existing primary care teams. The goal of MAINTAIN PRIME (Promoting Real (World) IMplEmentation) is to evaluate whether a successful electronic health record (EHR)-based weight maintenance intervention can be adapted to a new clinical setting with primary care staff serving as coaches. METHODS: EHR tools include tracking tools, standardized surveys, and standardized "SmartPhrases" for coaching. Inclusion criteria were age 18-75 years, voluntary 5% weight loss in the past 2 years with prior BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, and no bariatric procedures in past 2 years. Participants were randomized 1:1 to tailored online coaching with EHR tracking tools (coaching) or EHR tracking tools alone (tracking). RESULTS: We screened 405 individuals between September 2021 and April 2023; 269 participants enrolled (134 coaching; 135 tracking). The most common reason for not enrolling was ineligibility (55%). At baseline, participants were 50.3 (SD 15.02) years old, 66.4% female, and 84% White; 83.7% reported moderate physical activity. Average weight and BMI at baseline were 205.0 (SD 48.9) lbs. and 33.2 (6.8) kg/m2, respectively. Participants lost an average of 10.7% (SD 5.2) of their body weight before enrolling. We recruited 39 primary care coaches over the same period. Conclusion The study successfully identified and recruited primary care patients with recent intentional weight loss for participation in a weight maintenance program that uses EHR-based tools. We also successfully recruited and trained primary care staff as coaches.

Artificial intelligence predictive analytics in heart failure: results of the pilot phase of a pragmatic randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted an implementation planning process during the pilot phase of a pragmatic trial, which tests an intervention guided by artificial intelligence (AI) analytics sourced from noninvasive monitoring data in heart failure patients (LINK-HF2). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mixed-method analysis was conducted at 2 pilot sites. Interviews were conducted with 12 of 27 enrolled patients and with 13 participating clinicians. iPARIHS constructs were used for interview construction to identify workflow, communication patterns, and clinician's beliefs. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using inductive coding protocols to identify key themes. Behavioral response data from the AI-generated notifications were collected. RESULTS: Clinicians responded to notifications within 24 hours in 95% of instances, with 26.7% resulting in clinical action. Four implementation themes emerged: (1) High anticipatory expectations for reliable patient communications, reduced patient burden, and less proactive provider monitoring. (2) The AI notifications required a differential and tailored balance of trust and action advice related to role. (3) Clinic experience with other home-based programs influenced utilization. (4) Responding to notifications involved significant effort, including electronic health record (EHR) review, patient contact, and consultation with other clinicians. DISCUSSION: Clinician's use of AI data is a function of beliefs regarding the trustworthiness and usefulness of the data, the degree of autonomy in professional roles, and the cognitive effort involved. CONCLUSION: The implementation planning analysis guided development of strategies that addressed communication technology, patient education, and EHR integration to reduce clinician and patient burden in the subsequent main randomized phase of the trial. Our results provide important insights into the unique implications of implementing AI analytics into clinical workflow.

Impact of prior COVID-19 infection on perceptions about the benefit and safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

In this online survey of 1,733 US adults in December 2021, respondents believed COVID-19 vaccines are less beneficial and less safe for someone who had already had COVID-19. Those who experienced COVID-19 after being vaccinated believed that the vaccines are less beneficial and less safe than those who had not. Findings highlight the need to better communicate evolving evidence of COVID-19 vaccine benefit and safety and to tailor communications to peoples' COVID-19 history and vaccination status.

Veterans and Nonveterans Coping With Stress During 4 Months of COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Identifying how people have been coping with stress during the COVID-19 pandemic allows us to anticipate how the population may react to similar stressors over time. In this study, we assessed patterns of coping styles among veterans and nonveterans, and stability and change in these strategies at 3 time points during the pandemic. METHODS: Using an online survey platform, we circulated a questionnaire at 3 time points during the period when COVID-19 vaccines became widely available (December 2-27, 2020; January 21-February 6, 2021; and March 8-23, 2021). The questionnaire asked participants about their extent of use of 11 coping strategies, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. RESULTS: A total of 2,085 participants (50.8% veterans) completed the questionnaire at 1 or more time points and 930 participants (62.8% veterans) completed it at all 3 time points. Cluster analysis identified 3 distinct coping styles: adaptive, distressed, and disengaged. Compared with nonveterans, veterans more commonly had adaptive and disengaged coping styles, and less commonly had a distressed coping style. The majority of the cohort (71.3%) changed coping style at least once during the study period. Participants who used the same coping style across all 3 time points reported lower levels of anxiety and depression. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate a need to better understand the dynamic nature of coping with pandemic-level stressors across time. We did not find patterns of change in coping styles, but our findings point to potential advantages of stability in coping style. It is possible that less adaptive styles that are more stable may be advantageous for mental health. This research has implications for supporting patients dealing with stress in family medicine.

Patient experiences with SARS-CoV-2: Associations between patient experience of disease and coping profiles.

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, (SARS-CoV-2,) caused an influx of patients with acute disease characterized by a variety of symptoms termed COVID-19 disease, with some patients going on to develop post-acute COVID-19 syndrome. Individual factors like sex or coping styles are associated with a person's disease experience and quality of life. Individual differences in coping styles used to manage COVID-19 related stress correlate with physical and mental health outcomes. Our study sought to understand the relationship between COVID-19 symptoms, severity of acute disease, and coping profiles. METHODS: An online survey to assess symptoms, functional status, and recovery in a large group of patients was nationally distributed online. The survey asked about symptoms, course of illness, and included the Brief-COPE and the adapted Social Relationship Inventory. We used descriptive and cluster analyses to characterize patterns of survey responses. RESULTS: 976 patients were included in the analysis. The most common symptoms reported by the patients were fatigue (72%), cough (71%), body aches/joint pain (66%), headache (62%), and fever/chills (62%). 284 participants reported PACS. We described three different coping profiles: outward, inward, and dynamic copers. DISCUSSION: Fatigue, cough, and body aches/joint pains were the most frequently reported symptoms. PACS patients were sicker, more likely to have been hospitalized. Of the three coping profiles, outward copers were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and had the healthiest coping strategies. Dynamic copers activated several coping strategies both positive and negative; they were also younger and more likely to report PACS. CONCLUSION: Cough, fatigue, and body aches/joint pain are common and most important to patients with acute COVID-19, while shortness of breath defined the experience for patients with PACS. Of the three coping profiles, dynamic copers were more likely to report PACS. Additional investigations into coping profiles in general, and the experience of COVID-19 and PACS is needed.

Considerations for using predictive models that include race as an input variable: The case study of lung cancer screening.

Indiscriminate use of predictive models incorporating race can reinforce biases present in source data and lead to an exacerbation of health disparities. In some countries, such as the United States, there is therefore a push to remove race from prediction models; however, there are still many prediction models that use race as an input. Biomedical informaticists who are given the responsibility of using these predictive models in healthcare environments are likely to be faced with questions like how to deal with race covariates in these models. Thus, there is a need for a pragmatic framework to help model users think through how to include race in their chosen model so as to avoid inadvertently exacerbating disparities. In this paper, we use the case study of lung cancer screening to propose a simple framework to guide how model users can approach the use (or non-use) of race inputs in the predictive models they are tasked with leveraging in electronic health records and clinical workflows.

Telehealth Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Veterans and Nonveterans: Web-Based Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, studies reported delays in health care usage due to safety concerns. Delays in care may result in increased morbidity and mortality from otherwise treatable conditions. Telehealth provides a safe alternative for patients to receive care when other circumstances make in-person care unavailable or unsafe, but information on patient experiences is limited. Understanding which people are more or less likely to use telehealth and their experiences can help tailor outreach efforts to maximize the impact of telehealth. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the characteristics of telehealth users and nonusers and their reported experiences among veteran and nonveteran respondents. METHODS: A nationwide web-based survey of current behaviors and health care experiences was conducted in December 2020-March 2021. The survey consisted of 3 waves, and the first wave is assessed here. Respondents included US adults participating in Qualtrics web-based panels. Primary outcomes were self-reported telehealth use and number of telehealth visits. The analysis used a 2-part regression model examining the association between telehealth use and the number of visits with respondent characteristics. RESULTS: There were 2085 participants in the first wave, and 898 (43.1%) reported using telehealth since the pandemic began. Most veterans who used telehealth reported much or somewhat preferring an in-person visit (336/474, 70.9%), while slightly less than half of nonveterans (189/424, 44.6%) reported this preference. While there was no significant difference between veteran and nonveteran likelihood of using telehealth (odds ratio [OR] 1.33, 95% CI 0.97-1.82), veterans were likely to have more visits when they did use it (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.49, 95% CI 1.07-2.07). Individuals were less likely to use telehealth and reported fewer visits if they were 55 years and older (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.25-0.62 for ages 55-64 years; IRR 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.66) or lived in a small city (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.92; IRR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.99). Receiving health care partly or primarily at the Veterans Health Administration (VA) was associated with telehealth use (primarily VA: OR 3.25, 95% CI 2.20-4.81; equal mix: OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.40-3.39) and more telehealth visits (primarily VA: IRR 1.5, 95% CI 1.10-2.04; equal mix: IRR 1.57, 95% CI 1.11-2.24). CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth will likely continue to be an important source of health care for patients, especially following situations like the COVID-19 pandemic. Some groups who may benefit from telehealth are still underserved. Telehealth services and outreach should be improved to provide accessible care for all.

Accomplished women leaders in informatics: insights about successful careers.

We sought to learn from the experiences of women leaders in informatics by interviewing women in Informatics leadership roles. Participants reported career challenges, how they built confidence, advice to their younger selves, and suggestions for attracting and retaining additional women. Respondents were 16 women in leadership roles in academia (n = 9) and industry (n = 7). We conducted a thematic analysis revealing: (1) careers in informatics are serendipitous and nurtured by supportive communities, (2) challenges in leadership were profoundly related to gender issues, (3) "Big wins" in informatics careers were about making a difference, and (4) women leaders highlighted resilience, excellence, and personal authenticity as important for future women leaders. Sexism is undeniably present, although not all participants reported overt gender barriers. Confidence and authenticity in leadership point to the value offered by individual leaders. The next step is to continue to foster an informatics culture that encourages authenticity across the gender spectrum.

Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care and Pulmonary Clinics: Pragmatic Clinical Trial of Electronic Health Record-Integrated Everyday Shared Decision-Making Tool and Clinician-Facing Prompts.

BACKGROUND: Although low-dose CT (LDCT) scan imaging lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality, it remains underused. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended to assess the balance of benefits and harms for each patient. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do clinician-facing electronic health record (EHR) prompts and an EHR-integrated everyday SDM tool designed to support routine incorporation of SDM into primary care improve LDCT scan imaging ordering and completion? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A preintervention and postintervention analysis was conducted in 30 primary care and four pulmonary clinics for visits with patients who met United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for LCS. Propensity scores were used to adjust for covariates. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the expected benefit from screening (high benefit vs intermediate benefit), pulmonologist involvement (ie, whether the patient was seen in a pulmonary clinic in addition to a primary care clinic), sex, and race and ethnicity. RESULTS: In the 12-month preintervention phase among 1,090 eligible patients, 77 patients (7.1%) had LDCT scan imaging orders and 48 patients (4.4%) completed screenings. In the 9-month intervention phase among 1,026 eligible patients, 280 patients (27.3%) had LDCT scan imaging orders and 182 patients (17.7%) completed screenings. Adjusted ORs were 4.9 (95% CI, 3.4-6.9; P < .001) and 4.7 (95% CI, 3.1-7.1; P < .001) for LDCT imaging ordering and completion, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed increases in ordering and completion for all patient subgroups. In the intervention phase, the SDM tool was used by 23 of 102 ordering providers (22.5%) and for 69 of 274 patients (25.2%) for whom LDCT scan imaging was ordered and who needed SDM at the time of ordering. INTERPRETATION: Clinician-facing EHR prompts and an EHR-integrated everyday SDM tool are promising approaches to improving LCS in the primary care setting. However, room for improvement remains. As such, further research is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04498052; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Parental Nonadherence to Health Policy Recommendations for Prevention of COVID-19 Transmission Among Children.

This survey study assesses whether parents had ever engaged in specific misrepresentation and nonadherence behaviors regarding public health measures for preventing COVID-19 transmission among children.

A qualitative evaluation of frontline clinician perspectives toward antibiotic stewardship programs.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the perspectives of caregivers that are not part of the antibiotic stewardship program (ASP) leadership team (eg, physicians, nurses, and clinical pharmacists), but who interact with ASPs in their role as frontline healthcare workers. DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured interviews. SETTING: The study was conducted in 2 large national healthcare systems including 7 hospitals in the Veterans' Health Administration and 4 hospitals in Intermountain Healthcare. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 157 participants. The current analysis includes 123 nonsteward clinicians: 47 physicians, 26 pharmacists, 29 nurses, and 21 hospital leaders. METHODS: Interviewers utilized a semistructured interview guide based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), which was tailored to the participant's role in the hospital as it related to ASPs. Qualitative analysis was conducted using a codebook based on the CFIR. RESULTS: We identified 4 primary perspectives regarding ASPs. (1) Non-ASP pharmacists considered antibiotic stewardship activities to be a high priority despite the added burden to work duties: (2) Nurses acknowledged limited understanding of ASP activities or involvement with these programs; (3) Physicians criticized ASPs for their restrictions on clinical autonomy and questioned the ability of antibiotic stewards to make recommendations without the full clinical picture; And (4) hospital leaders expressed support for ASPs and recognized the unique challenges faced by non-ASP clinical staff. CONCLUSION: Further understanding these differing perspectives of ASP implementation will inform possible ways to improve ASP implementation across clinical roles.

Antimicrobial physician and pharmacist experience and perception of an antimicrobial Self-Stewardship Time-Out Program (SSTOP) intervention at eight Veterans' Affairs medical centers.

We explored experiences and perceptions surrounding the Self-Stewardship Time-Out Program (SSTOP) intervention across implementation sites to improve antimicrobial use. Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with Antibiotic Stewardship physicians and pharmacists, from which 5 key themes emerged. SSTOP may serve to achieve sustainable promotion of antibiotic use improvements.

Age-friendly care in the Veterans Health Administration: Past, present, and future.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has long recognized the need for age-friendly care. VHA leadership anticipated the impact of aging World War II veterans on VA healthcare systems and in 1975 developed Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Centers (GRECCs) to meet this need. GRECCs catalyzed a series of innovations in geriatric models of care that span the continuum of care, most of which endure. These innovative care models also contributed to the evidence base supporting the present-day Age-Friendly Health Systems movement, with which VHA is inherently aligned. As both a provider of and payor for care, VHA is strongly incentivized to promote coordination across the continuum of care, with resultant cost savings. VHA is also a major contributor to developing the workforce that is essential for the provision of age-friendly care. As VHA continues to develop and refine innovative geriatric models of care, policymakers and non-VHA health care systems should look to VHA programs as exemplars for the development and implementation of age-friendly care.

Performance of infectious diseases specialists, hospitalists, and other internal medicine physicians in antimicrobial case-based scenarios: Potential impact of antimicrobial stewardship programs at 16 Veterans' Affairs medical centers.

OBJECTIVE: As part of a project to implement antimicrobial dashboards at select facilities, we assessed physician attitudes and knowledge regarding antibiotic prescribing. DESIGN: An online survey explored attitudes toward antimicrobial use and assessed respondents' management of four clinical scenarios: cellulitis, community-acquired pneumonia, non-catheter-associated asymptomatic bacteriuria, and catheter-associated asymptomatic bacteriuria. SETTING: This study was conducted across 16 Veterans' Affairs (VA) medical centers in 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians working in inpatient settings specializing in infectious diseases (ID), hospital medicine, and non-ID/hospitalist internal medicine. METHODS: Scenario responses were scored by assigning +1 for answers most consistent with guidelines, 0 for less guideline-concordant but acceptable answers and -1 for guideline-discordant answers. Scores were normalized to 100% guideline concordant to 100% guideline discordant across all questions within a scenario, and mean scores were calculated across respondents by specialty. Differences in mean score per scenario were tested using analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: Overall, 139 physicians completed the survey (19 ID physicians, 62 hospitalists, and 58 other internists). Attitudes were similar across the 3 groups. We detected a significant difference in cellulitis scenario scores (concordance: ID physicians, 76%; hospitalists, 58%; other internists, 52%; P = .0087). Scores were numerically but not significantly different across groups for community-acquired pneumonia (concordance: ID physicians, 75%; hospitalists, 60%; other internists, 56%; P = .0914), for non-catheter-associated asymptomatic bacteriuria (concordance: ID physicians, 65%; hospitalists, 55%; other internists, 40%; P = .322), and for catheter-associated asymptomatic bacteriuria (concordance: ID physicians, 27% concordant; hospitalists, 8% discordant; other internists 13% discordant; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in performance regarding management of cellulitis and low overall performance regarding asymptomatic bacteriuria point to these conditions as being potentially high-yield targets for stewardship interventions.

Misrepresentation and Nonadherence Regarding COVID-19 Public Health Measures.

Importance: The effectiveness of public health measures implemented to mitigate the spread and impact of SARS-CoV-2 relies heavily on honesty and adherence from the general public. Objective: To examine the frequency of, reasons for, and factors associated with misrepresentation and nonadherence regarding COVID-19 public health measures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study recruited a national, nonprobability sample of US adults to participate in an online survey using Qualtrics online panels (participation rate, 1811 of 2260 [80.1%]) from December 8 to 23, 2021. The survey contained screening questions to allow for a targeted sample of one-third who had had COVID-19, one-third who had not had COVID-19 and were vaccinated, and one-third who had not had COVID-19 and were unvaccinated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The survey assessed 9 different types of misrepresentation and nonadherence related to COVID-19 public health measures and the reasons underlying such behaviors. Additional questions measured COVID-19-related beliefs and behaviors and demographic characteristics. Results: The final sample included 1733 participants. The mean (SD) participant age was 41 (15) years and the sample predominantly identified as female (1143 of 1732 [66.0%]) and non-Hispanic White (1151 of 1733 [66.4%]). Seven hundred twenty-one participants (41.6%) reported misrepresentation and/or nonadherence in at least 1 of the 9 items; telling someone they were with or about to be with in person that they were taking more COVID-19 preventive measures than they actually were (420 of 1726 [24.3%]) and breaking quarantine rules (190 of 845 [22.5%]) were the most common manifestations. The most commonly endorsed reasons included wanting life to feel normal and wanting to exercise personal freedom. All age groups younger than 60 years (eg, odds ratio for those aged 18-29 years, 4.87 [95% CI, 3.27-7.34]) and those who had greater distrust in science (odds ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.05-1.23]) had significantly higher odds of misrepresentation and/or nonadherence for at least 1 of the 9 items. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of US adults, nearly half of participants reported misrepresentation and/or nonadherence regarding public health measures against COVID-19. Future work is needed to examine strategies for communicating the consequences of misrepresentation and nonadherence and to address contributing factors.

Shared Decision-Making for Drug-Drug Interactions: Formative Evaluation of an Anticoagulant Drug Interaction.

BACKGROUND: Warnings about drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between warfarin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) within electronic health records indicate potential harm but fail to account for contextual factors and preferences. We developed a tool called DDInteract to enhance and support shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and physicians when both warfarin and NSAIDs are used concurrently. DDInteract was designed to be integrated into electronic health records using interoperability standards. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a formative evaluation of a DDInteract that incorporates patient and product contextual factors to estimate the risk of bleeding. METHODS: A randomized formative evaluation was conducted to compare DDInteract to usual care (UC) using physician-patient dyads. Using case vignettes, physicians and patients on warfarin participated in simulated virtual clinical encounters where they discussed the use of taking ibuprofen and warfarin concurrently and determined an appropriate therapeutic plan based on the patient's individualized risk. Dyads were randomized to either DDInteract or UC. Participants completed a postsession interview and survey of the SDM process. This included the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9), tool usability and workload National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index, Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) scale, System Usability Scale (SUS), and Decision Conflict Scale (DCS). They also were interviewed after the session to obtain perceptions on DDInteract and UC resources for DDIs. RESULTS: Twelve dyad encounters were performed using virtual software. Most (n=11, 91.7%) patients were over 50 years of age, and 9 (75%) had been taking warfarin for more than 2 years (75%). Regarding scores on the SDM-Q-9, participants rated DDInteract higher than UC for questions pertaining to helping patients clarify the decision (P=.03), involving patients in the decision (P=.01), displaying treatment options (P<.001), identifying advantages and disadvantages (P=.01), and facilitating patient understanding (P=.01) and discussion of preferences (P=.01). Five of the 8 UTAUT constructs showed differences between the 2 groups, favoring DDInteract (P<.05). Usability ratings from the SUS were significantly higher (P<.05) for physicians using DDInteract compared to those in the UC group but showed no differences from the patient's perspective. No differences in patient responses were observed between groups using the DCS. During the session debrief, physicians indicated little concern for the additional time or workload entailed by DDInteract use. Both clinicians and patients indicated that the tool was beneficial in simulated encounters to understand and mitigate the risk of harm from this DDI. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, DDInteract may improve encounters where there is a risk of bleeding due to a potential drug-drug interaction involving anticoagulants. Participants rated DDInteract as logical and useful for enhancing SDM. They reported that they would be willing to use the tool for an interaction involving warfarin and NSAIDs.

Communication Disparities between Nursing Home Team Members.

Optimal care in nursing home (NH) settings requires effective team communication. Certified nursing assistants (CNAs) interact with nursing home residents frequently, but the extent to which CNAs feel their input is valued by other team members is not known. We conducted a cross-sectional study in which we administered a communication survey within 20 Utah nursing home facilities to 650 team members, including 124 nurses and 264 CNAs. Respondents used a 4-point scale to indicate the extent to which their input is valued by other team members when reporting their concerns about nursing home residents. We used a one-way ANOVA with a Bonferroni correction. When compared to nurses, CNAs felt less valued (CNA mean = 2.14, nurse mean = 3.24; p < 0.001) when reporting to physicians, and less valued (CNA mean = 1.66, nurse mean = 2.71; p < 0.001) when reporting to pharmacists. CNAs did not feel less valued than nurses (CNA mean = 3.43, nurse mean = 3.37; p = 0.25) when reporting to other nurses. Our findings demonstrate that CNAs feel their input is not valued outside of nursing, which could impact resident care. Additional research is needed to understand the reasons for this perception and to design educational interventions to improve the culture of communication in nursing home settings.

Clinician documentation of patient centered care in the electronic health record.

BACKGROUND: In this study we sought to explore the possibility of using patient centered care (PCC) documentation as a measure of the delivery of PCC in a health system. METHODS: We first selected 6 VA medical centers based on their scores for a measure of support for self-management subscale from a national patient satisfaction survey (the Survey for Healthcare Experience-Patients). We accessed clinical notes related to either smoking cessation or weight management consults. We then annotated this dataset of notes for documentation of PCC concepts including: patient goals, provider support for goal progress, social context, shared decision making, mention of caregivers, and use of the patient's voice. We examined the association of documentation of PCC with patients' perception of support for self-management with regression analyses. RESULTS: Two health centers had < 50 notes related to either tobacco cessation or weight management consults and were removed from further analysis. The resulting dataset includes 477 notes related to 311 patients total from 4 medical centers. For a majority of patients (201 out of 311; 64.8%) at least one PCC concept was present in their clinical notes. The most common PCC concepts documented were patient goals (patients n = 126; 63% clinical notes n = 302; 63%), patient voice (patients n = 165, 82%; clinical notes n = 323, 68%), social context (patients n = 105, 52%; clinical notes n = 181, 38%), and provider support for goal progress (patients n = 124, 62%; clinical notes n = 191, 40%). Documentation of goals for weight loss notes was greater at health centers with higher satisfaction scores compared to low. No such relationship was found for notes related to tobacco cessation. CONCLUSION: Providers document PCC concepts in their clinical notes. In this pilot study we explored the feasibility of using this data as a means to measure the degree to which care in a health center is patient centered. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: clinical EHR notes are a rich source of information about PCC that could potentially be used to assess PCC over time and across systems with scalable technologies such as natural language processing.