RESUMO
Our study aimed to describe patient experience of information coordination between their primary care physician and specialists and to examine the associations between their experience and their personal and primary care characteristics. We conducted a cross-sectional study of Ontario residents rostered to a primary care physician and visited a specialist physician in the previous 12 months by linking population-based health administrative data to the Health Care Experience Survey collected between 2013 and 2020. We described respondents' sociodemographic and health care utilization characteristics and their experience of information coordination between their primary care physician and specialists. We measured the adjusted association between patient-reported measures of information coordination before and after respondents received care from a specialist physician and their type of primary care model. 1,460 out 20,422 (weighted 7.5%) of the respondents reported that their specialist physician did not have basic medical information about their visit from their primary care physician in the previous 12 months. 2,298 out of 16,442 (weighted 14.9%) of the respondents reported that their primary care physician seemed uninformed about the care they received from the specialist. Females, younger individuals, those with a college or undergraduate level of education, and users of walk-in clinics had a higher likelihood of reporting a lack of information coordination between the primary care and specialist physicians. Only respondents rostered to an enhanced fee-for-service model had a higher odds of reporting that the specialist physician did not have basic medical information about their visit compared to those rostered to a Family Health Team (OR 1.22, 95% Cl 1.12-1.40). We found no significant association between respondent's type of primary care model and that their primary care physician was uninformed about the care received from the specialist physician. In this population-based health study, respondents reported high information coordination between their primary care physician and specialists. Except for respondents rostered to an enhanced fee-for-service model of care, we did not find any difference in information coordination across other primary care models.
Assuntos
Médicos de Atenção Primária , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Estudos Transversais , Médicos de Atenção Primária/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ontário , Especialização/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto Jovem , AdolescenteRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Current scores for predicting sepsis outcomes are limited by generalizability, complexity, and electronic medical record (EMR) integration. Here, we validate a simple EMR-based score for sepsis outcomes in a large multi-centre cohort. DESIGN: A simple electronic medical record-based predictor of illness severity in sepsis (SEPSIS) score was developed (4 additive lab-based predictors) using a population-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Internal medicine services across four academic teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada from April 2010-March 2015 (primary cohort) and 2015-2019 (secondary cohort). PATIENTS: We identified patients admitted with sepsis based upon receipt of antibiotics and positive cultures. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes were ICU admission at 72 hours, and hospital length of stay (LOS). We calculated the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) for the SEPSIS score, qSOFA, and NEWS2. We then evaluated the SEPSIS score in a secondary cohort (2015-2019) of hospitalized patients receiving antibiotics. Our primary cohort included 1,890 patients with a median age of 72 years (IQR: 56-83). 9% died during hospitalization, 18.6% were admitted to ICU, and mean LOS was 12.7 days (SD: 21.5). In the primary and secondary (2015-2019, 4811 patients) cohorts, the AUROCs of the SEPSIS score for predicting in-hospital mortality were 0.63 and 0.64 respectively, which were similar to NEWS2 (0.62 and 0.67) and qSOFA (0.62 and 0.68). AUROCs for predicting ICU admission at 72 hours, and length of stay > 14 days, were similar between scores, in the primary and secondary cohorts. All scores had comparable calibration for predicting mortality. CONCLUSIONS: An EMR-based SEPSIS score shows a similar ability to predict important clinical outcomes compared with other validated scores (qSOFA and NEWS2). Because of the SEPSIS score's simplicity, it may prove a useful tool for clinical and research applications.
Assuntos
Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Sepse , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Humanos , Sepse/mortalidade , Sepse/diagnóstico , Masculino , Idoso , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Tempo de Internação , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Curva ROCRESUMO
Repetitive elements (REs) are often expressed at higher levels in tumor cells than normal cells, implicating these genomic regions as an untapped pool of tumor-associated antigens. In ovarian cancer (OC), protein from the RE ERV-K is frequently expressed by tumor cells. Here we determined whether the targeting of a previously identified immunogenic epitope in the envelope gene (env) of ERV-K resulted in target antigen specificity in non-HIV-1 settings. We found that transducing healthy donor T cells with an ERV-K-Env-specific T cell receptor construct resulted in antigen specificity only when co-cultured with HLA-A*03:01 B lymphoblastoid cells. Furthermore, these transduced T cells were not specific for HLA-A*03:01 + OC cells nor for the cognate peptide in HLA-matched systems from multiple healthy donors. These data suggest that the ERV-K-Env epitope recognized by this T cell receptor is of low immunogenicity and has limited potential as a T cell target for OC.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-quality primary care is associated with better health outcomes and more efficient and equitable health system performance. However, the rate of primary care attachment is falling, and timely access to primary care is worsening, driving many patients to use walk-in clinics for their comprehensive primary care needs. This study sought to explore the experiences and perceived roles and responsibilities of walk-in physicians in this current climate. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with nineteen physicians currently providing walk-in care in Ontario, Canada between May and December 2022. RESULTS: Limited capacity for continuity and comprehensiveness of care were identified as major sources of professional tension for walk-in physicians. Divergent perspectives on their roles were anchored in how physicians viewed their professional identity. Some saw providing continuous and comprehensive care as an infringement on their professional role; others saw their professional role as more flexible and responsive to population needs. Regardless of their professional identity, participants reported feeling ill-equipped to manage the swell of unattached patients, citing a lack of time, resources, connectivity to the system, and remuneration flexibility. Conclusions: As practice demands of walk-in clinics change, an evolution in the professional roles and responsibilities of walk-in physicians follows. However, the resources, structure, and incentives of walk-in care have not evolved to reflect this, leaving physicians to set their own professional boundaries with patients. This results in increasing variations in care and confusion across the primary care sector around who is responsible for what, when, and how.
Assuntos
Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Humanos , Ontário , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Papel do Médico , Adulto , Instituições de Assistência Ambulatorial , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Médicos/psicologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Delirium is a major cause of preventable mortality and morbidity in hospitalized adults, but accurately determining rates of delirium remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE: To characterize and compare medical inpatients identified as having delirium using two common methods, administrative data and retrospective chart review. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 3881 randomly selected internal medicine hospital admissions from six acute care hospitals in Toronto and Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. Delirium status was determined using ICD-10-CA codes from hospital administrative data and through a previously validated chart review method. Baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, processes of care and outcomes were compared across those without delirium in hospital and those with delirium as determined by administrative data and chart review. RESULTS: Delirium was identified in 6.3% of admissions by ICD-10-CA codes compared to 25.7% by chart review. Using chart review as the reference standard, ICD-10-CA codes for delirium had sensitivity 24.1% (95%CI: 21.5-26.8%), specificity 99.8% (95%CI: 99.5-99.9%), positive predictive value 97.6% (95%CI: 94.6-98.9%), and negative predictive value 79.2% (95%CI: 78.6-79.7%). Age over 80, male gender, and Charlson comorbidity index greater than 2 were associated with misclassification of delirium. Inpatient mortality and median costs of care were greater in patients determined to have delirium by ICD-10-CA codes (5.8% greater mortality, 95% CI: 2.0-9.5 and $6824 greater cost, 95%CI: 4713-9264) and by chart review (11.9% greater mortality, 95%CI: 9.5-14.2% and $4967 greater cost, 95%CI: 4415-5701), compared to patients without delirium. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative data are specific but highly insensitive, missing most cases of delirium in hospital. Mortality and costs of care were greater for both the delirium cases that were detected and missed by administrative data. Better methods of routinely measuring delirium in hospital are needed.
Assuntos
Delírio , Classificação Internacional de Doenças , Humanos , Delírio/diagnóstico , Delírio/epidemiologia , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ontário/epidemiologia , Hospitalização , Estudos de CoortesRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Health administrative data can be used to improve the health of people who inject drugs by informing public health surveillance and program planning, monitoring, and evaluation. However, methodological gaps in the use of these data persist due to challenges in accurately identifying injection drug use (IDU) at the population level. In this study, we validated case-ascertainment algorithms for identifying people who inject drugs using health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data from cohorts of people with recent (past 12 months) IDU, including those participating in community-based research studies or seeking drug treatment, were linked to health administrative data in Ontario from 1992 to 2020. We assessed the validity of algorithms to identify IDU over varying look-back periods (ie, all years of data [1992 onwards] or within the past 1-5 years), including inpatient and outpatient physician billing claims for drug use, emergency department (ED) visits or hospitalizations for drug use or injection-related infections, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT). RESULTS: Algorithms were validated using data from 15,241 people with recent IDU (918 in community cohorts and 14,323 seeking drug treatment). An algorithm consisting of ≥1 physician visit, ED visit, or hospitalization for drug use, or OAT record could effectively identify IDU history (91.6% sensitivity and 94.2% specificity) and recent IDU (using 3-year look back: 80.4% sensitivity, 99% specificity) among community cohorts. Algorithms were generally more sensitive among people who inject drugs seeking drug treatment. CONCLUSION: Validated algorithms using health administrative data performed well in identifying people who inject drugs. Despite their high sensitivity and specificity, the positive predictive value of these algorithms will vary depending on the underlying prevalence of IDU in the population in which they are applied.
Assuntos
Algoritmos , Abuso de Substâncias por Via Intravenosa , Humanos , Ontário/epidemiologia , Abuso de Substâncias por Via Intravenosa/epidemiologia , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
COVID-19 booster dose vaccination has been crucial in ensuring protection against COVID-19 including recently predominant Omicron variants. Because vaccines against newer SARS-CoV- 2 variants are likely to be recommended in future, it will be valuable to understand past booster dose uptake among different demographic groups. Using U.S. vaccination data, this study examined intervals between primary series completion and receipt of first booster dose (monovalent or bivalent) during August 2021 - October 2022 among persons ≥12 years of age who had completed a COVID-19 vaccine primary series by October 2021. Sub-populations who were late booster recipients (received a booster dose ≥12 months after the primary series) or received no booster dose included persons <35 years old, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine primary dose recipients, persons in certain racial and ethnic groups, and persons living in rural and more socially vulnerable areas, and in the South region of the United States; these groups may benefit the most from public health outreach efforts to achieve timely COVID-19 vaccination completion in future.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Criança , Adulto , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , EtnicidadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether presence of a psychiatric comorbidity impacts use of inpatient imaging tests and subsequent wait times. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients admitted to General Internal Medicine (GIM) at five academic hospitals in Toronto, Ontario from 2010 to 2019. Exposure was presence of a coded psychiatric comorbidity on admission. Primary outcome was time to test, as calculated from the time of test ordering to time of test completion, for computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound, or peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion. Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to identify predictors of time to test, and marginal effects were used to calculate differences in absolute units (h). Secondary outcome was the rate of each type of test included. Subgroup analyses were performed according to type of psychiatric comorbidity: psychotic, mood/anxiety, or substance use disorder. RESULTS: There were 196,819 GIM admissions from 2010to 2019. In 77,562 admissions, ≥1 advanced imaging test was performed. After adjusting for all covariates, presence of any psychiatric comorbidity was associated with increased time to test for MRI (adjusted difference: 5.3 h, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.9-6.8), PICC (adjusted difference: 3.7 h, 95% CI: 1.6-5.8), and ultrasound (adjusted difference: 3.0 h, 95% CI: 2.3-3.8), but not for CT (adjusted difference: 0.1 h, 95% CI: -0.3 to 0.5). Presence of any psychiatric comorbidity was associated with lower rate of ordering for all test types (adjusted difference: -17.2 tests per 100 days hospitalization, interquartile range: -18.0 to -16.3). CONCLUSIONS: There was a lower rate of ordering of advanced imaging among patients with psychiatric comorbidity. Once ordered, time to test completion was longer for MRI, ultrasound, and PICC. Further exploration, such as quantifying rates of cancelled tests and qualitative studies evaluating hospital, provider, and patient barriers to timely advanced imaging, will be helpful in elucidating causes for these disparities.
Assuntos
Pacientes Internados , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Comorbidade , AnsiedadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: In Canada, patients whose acute medical issues have been resolved but are awaiting discharge from hospital are designated as alternate level of care (ALC). We investigated short-term mortality and palliative care use following ALC designation in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of adult, acute care hospital admissions in Ontario with an ALC designation between January and December 2021. Our follow-up window was until 90 days post-ALC designation or death. Setting of discharge and death was determined using admission and discharge dates from multiple databases. We measured palliative care using physician billings, inpatient palliative care records and palliative home care records. We compared the characteristics of ALC patients by 90-day survival status and compared palliative care use across settings of discharge and death. RESULTS: We included 54 839 ALC patients with a median age of 80 years. Nearly one-fifth (18.4%) of patients died within 90 days. Patients who died were older, had more comorbid conditions and were more likely to be male. Among those who died, 35.1% were never discharged from hospital and 20.3% were discharged but ultimately died in the hospital. The majority of people who died received palliative care following their ALC designation (68.1%). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients experiencing delayed discharge die within 3 months, with the majority dying in hospitals despite being identified as ready to be discharged. Future research should examine the adequacy of palliative care provision for this population.
RESUMO
Strategies to ramp up breast cancer screening after COVID-19 require data on the influence of the pandemic on groups of women with historically low screening uptake. Using data from Ontario, Canada, our objectives were to 1) quantify the overall pandemic impact on weekly bilateral screening mammography rates (per 100,000) of average-risk women aged 50-74 and 2) examine if COVID-19 has shifted any mammography inequalities according to age, immigration status, rurality, and access to material resources. Using a segmented negative binomial regression model, we estimated the mean change in rate at the start of the pandemic (the week of March 15, 2020) and changes in weekly trend of rates during the pandemic period (March 15-December 26, 2020) compared to the pre-pandemic period (January 3, 2016-March 14, 2020) for all women and for each subgroup. A 3-way interaction term (COVID-19*week*subgroup variable) was added to the model to detect any pandemic impact on screening disparities. Of the 3,481,283 mammograms, 8.6 % (n = 300,064) occurred during the pandemic period. Overall, the mean weekly rate dropped by 93.4 % (95 % CI 91.7 % - 94.8 %) at the beginning of COVID-19, followed by a weekly increase of 8.4 % (95 % CI 7.4 % - 9.4 %) until December 26, 2020. The pandemic did not shift any disparities (all interactions p > 0.05) and that women who were under 60 or over 70, immigrants, or with a limited access to material resources had persistently low screening rate in both periods. Interventions should proactively target these underserved populations with the goals of reducing advanced-stage breast cancer presentations and mortality.
RESUMO
Immunizations are an important tool to reduce the burden of vaccine preventable diseases and improve population health.1 High-quality immunization data is essential to inform clinical and public health interventions and respond to outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. To track COVID-19 vaccines and vaccinations, CDC established an integrated network that included vaccination provider systems, health information exchange systems, immunization information systems, pharmacy and dialysis systems, vaccine ordering systems, electronic health records, and tools to support mass vaccination clinics. All these systems reported data to CDC's COVID-19 response system (either directly or indirectly) where it was processed, analyzed, and disseminated. This unprecedented vaccine tracking effort provided essential information for public health officials that was used to monitor the COVID-19 response and guide decisions. This paper will describe systems, processes, and policies that enabled monitoring and reporting of COVID-19 vaccination efforts and share challenges and lessons learned for future public health emergency responses.
RESUMO
Importance: Virtual visits became more common after the COVID-19 pandemic, but it is unclear in what context they are best used. Objective: To investigate whether there was a difference in subsequent emergency department use between patients who had a virtual visit with their own family physician vs those who had virtual visits with an outside physician. Design, Setting, and Participants: This propensity score-matched cohort study was conducted among all Ontario residents attached to a family physician as of April 1, 2021, who had a virtual family physician visit in the subsequent year (to March 31, 2022). Exposure: The type of virtual family physician visit, with own or outside physician, was determined. In a secondary analysis, own physician visits were compared with visits with a physician working in direct-to-consumer telemedicine. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was an emergency department visit within 7 days after the virtual visit. Results: Among 5â¯229â¯240 Ontario residents with a family physician and virtual visit, 4â¯173â¯869 patients (79.8%) had a virtual encounter with their own physician (mean [SD] age, 49.3 [21.5] years; 2â¯420â¯712 females [58.0%]) and 1â¯055â¯371 patients (20.2%) had an encounter with an outside physician (mean [SD] age, 41.8 [20.9] years; 605â¯614 females [57.4%]). In the matched cohort of 1â¯885â¯966 patients, those who saw an outside physician were 66% more likely to visit an emergency department within 7 days than those who had a virtual visit with their own physician (30â¯748 of 942â¯983 patients [3.3%] vs 18â¯519 of 942â¯983 patients [2.0%]; risk difference, 1.3% [95% CI, 1.2%-1.3%]; relative risk, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.63-1.69]). The increase in the risk of emergency department visits was greater when comparing 30â¯216 patients with definite direct-to-consumer telemedicine visits with 30â¯216 patients with own physician visits (risk difference, 4.1% [95% CI, 3.8%-4.5%]; relative risk, 2.99 [95% CI, 2.74-3.27]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patients whose virtual visit was with an outside physician were more likely to visit an emergency department in the next 7 days than those whose virtual visit was with their own family physician. These findings suggest that primary care virtual visits may be best used within an existing clinical relationship.