Cannabis Use Reported by Patients Receiving Primary Care in a Large Health System.

Importance: Despite the changing legal status of cannabis and the potential impact on health, few health systems routinely screen for cannabis use, and data on the epidemiology of cannabis use, and especially medical cannabis use among primary care patients, are limited. Objective: To describe the prevalence of, factors associated with, and reasons for past-3 month cannabis use reported by primary care patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used electronic health record data from patients aged 18 years and older who had an annual wellness visit between January 2021 and May 2023 from a primary care clinic within a university-based health system in Los Angeles, California. Exposures: Factors of interest included age, race and ethnicity, sex, employment status, and neighborhood Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Main Outcomes and Measures: Cannabis use was assessed using the Alcohol Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Patients were also asked about reasons for use, symptoms for which they used cannabis, and mode of use. Results: Among the 175 734 patients screened, the median (range) age was 47 (18-102) years; 101 657 (58.0%) were female; 25 278 (15.7%) were Asian, 21 971 (13.7%) were Hispanic, and 51 063 (31.7%) were White. Cannabis use was reported by 29 898 (17.0%), with 10 360 (34.7%) having ASSIST scores indicative of moderate to high risk for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Prevalence of cannabis use was higher among male patients than female patients (14 939 [20.0%] vs 14 916 [14.7%]) and younger patients (18-29 years, 7592 [31.0%]; ≥60 years, 4200 [8.5%]), and lower among those who lived in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods (ADI decile 9-10, 189 [13.8%]; ADI decile 1-2, 12 431 [17.4%]). The most common modes of use included edibles (18 201 [61.6%]), smoking (15 256 [51.7%]), and vaporizing (8555 [29.0%]). While 4375 patients who reported using cannabis (15.6%) did so for medical reasons only, 21 986 patients (75.7%) reported using cannabis to manage symptoms including pain (9196 [31.7%]), stress (14 542 [50.2%]), and sleep (16 221 [56.0%]). The median (IQR) number of symptoms managed was 2 (1-4), which was higher among patients who were at moderate to high risk for CUD (4 [2-6] symptoms). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, cannabis use and risk of CUD were common, and more than three-quarters of patients who reported any cannabis use reported doing so to manage a health-related symptom. These findings suggest that integration of information regarding cannabis use for symptom management could help provide a crucial point-of-care opportunity for clinicians to understand their patients' risk for CUD.

Reducing hypoglycemia from overtreatment of type 2 diabetes in older adults: The HypoPrevent study.

BACKGROUND: Hypoglycemia from overtreatment is a serious but underrecognized complication among older adults with type 2 diabetes. However, diabetes treatment is seldom deintensified. We assessed the effectiveness of a Clinical Decision Support (CDS) tool and shared decision-making (SDM) in decreasing the number of patients at risk for hypoglycemia and reducing the impact of non-severe hypoglycemic events. METHODS: HypoPrevent was a pre-post, single arm study at a five-site primary care practice. We identified at-risk patients (≥65 years-old, with type 2 diabetes, treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, and HbA1c < 7.0%). During three clinic visits over 6 months, clinicians used the CDS tool and SDM to assess hypoglycemic risk, set individualized HbA1c goals, and adjust use of hypoglycemic agents. We assessed the number of patients setting individualized HbA1c goals or modifying medication use, changes in the population at risk for hypoglycemia, and changes in impact of non-severe hypoglycemic events using a validated patient-reported outcome tool (TRIM-HYPO). RESULTS: We enrolled 94 patients (mean age-74; mean HbA1c (±SD)-6.36% ± 0.43), of whom 94% set an individualized HbA1c goal at either the baseline or first follow-up visit. Ninety patients completed the study. Insulin or sulfonylurea use was decreased or eliminated in 20%. An HbA1c level before and after goal setting was obtained in 53% (N = 50). Among these patients, the mean HbA1c increased 0.53% (p < 0.0001) and the number of patients at-risk decreased by 46% (p < 0.0001). Statistically significant reductions in the impact of hypoglycemia during daily activities occurred in both the total score and each functional domain of TRIM-HYPO. CONCLUSIONS: In a population of older patients at risk for hypoglycemia, the use of a CDS tool and SDM reduced the population at risk and decreased the use of insulin and sulfonylureas. Using a patient-reported outcome tool, we demonstrated significant reductions in the impact of hypoglycemia on daily life.

Meaningful use's benefits and burdens for US family physicians.

Objective: The federal meaningful use (MU) program was aimed at improving adoption and use of electronic health records, but practicing physicians have criticized it. This study was aimed at quantifying the benefits (ie, usefulness) and burdens (ie, workload) of the MU program for practicing family physicians. Materials and Methods: An interdisciplinary national panel of experts (physicians and engineers) identified the work associated with MU criteria during patient encounters. They conducted a national survey to assess each criterion's level of patient benefit and compliance burden. Results: In 2015, 480 US family physicians responded to the survey. Their demographics were comparable to US norms. Eighteen of 31 MU criteria were perceived as useful for more than half of patient encounters, with 13 of those being useful for more than two-thirds. Thirteen criteria were useful for less than half of patient encounters. Four useful criteria were reported as having a high compliance burden. Discussion: There was high variability in physicians' perceived benefits and burdens of MU criteria. MU Stage 1 criteria, which are more related to basic/routine care, were perceived as beneficial by most physicians. Stage 2 criteria, which are more related to complex and population care, were perceived as less beneficial and more burdensome to comply with. Conclusion: MU was discontinued, but the merit-based incentive payment system within the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 adopted its criteria. For many physicians, MU created a significant practice burden without clear benefits to patient care. This study suggests that policymakers should not assess MU in aggregate, but as individual criteria for open discussion.

Comparison of electronic brachytherapy and Mohs micrographic surgery for the treatment of early-stage non-melanoma skin cancer: a matched pair cohort study.

PURPOSE: High-dose-rate electronic brachytherapy (EBT) provides a non-surgical treatment option for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC). This matched-pair cohort study compared the outcomes of treatment with EBT to those of Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) in patients with NMSC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: At four treatment centers, patients treated with EBT were case matched to patients treated with MMS based on retrospectively-collected patient age, lesion size, location and type, and year of treatment. Follow-up data were prospectively collected and included local recurrence, toxicities, cosmesis, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: The 369 patients (188 in the EBT treatment group and 181 in the MMS treatment group) had 416 lesions (208 in the EBT group and 208 in the MMS group), including 226 basal cell carcinomas (BCC) and 190 squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). Most patients were Caucasian (98.9% and 99.5%) and male (65.4% and 66.3%) of median age 80.7 (range: 61-98) (EBT) and 76.8 (range: 51-98) years (MMS). Most lesions were size > 1 cm and ≤ 2 cm, and located on the head. At mean 3.4 years post-treatment, 99.5% of EBT, and 100.0% of MMS-treated lesions were free of recurrence (p = ns). One recurrence was noted in the EBT group. Physicians rated cosmesis as "excellent" or "good" in 97.6% of EBT-treated lesions, and 95.7% of MMS-treated lesions. CONCLUSIONS: This matched-pair cohort study supports the use of EBT as an effective non-surgical treatment option for NMSC with equivalent recurrence rates and cosmetic outcomes to MMS in appropriately-selected patients with early stage NMSC at extended follow-up.