A Four-Arm Randomized Clinical Trial of Topical Pain Control for Sentinel Node Radiotracer Injections in Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Radioactive tracer injections for breast cancer sentinel lymph node mapping can be painful. In this randomized trial, we compared four approaches to topical pain control for radiotracer injections. METHODS: Breast cancer patients were randomized (9 April 2021-8 May 2022) to receive the institutional standard of ice prior to injection (n = 44), or one of three treatments: ice plus a vibrating distraction device (Buzzy®; n = 39), 4% lidocaine patch (n = 44), or 4% lidocaine patch plus ice plus Buzzy® (n = 40). Patients completed the Wong-Baker FACES® pain score (primary outcome) and a satisfaction with pain control received scale (secondary). Nuclear medicine technologists (n = 8) rated perceived pain control and ease of administration for each patient. At study conclusion, technologists rank-ordered treatments. Data were analyzed as intention-to-treat. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare pain scores of control versus pooled treatment arms (primary) and then control to each treatment arm individually (secondary). RESULTS: There were no differences in pain scores between the control and treatment groups, both pooled and individually. Eighty-five percent of patients were 'satisfied/very satisfied' with treatment received, with no differences between groups. No differences in providers' perceptions of pain were observed, although providers perceived treatments involving Buzzy© more difficult to administer (p < 0.001). Providers rated lidocaine patch as the easiest, with ice being second. CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial, no differences in patient-reported pain or satisfaction with treatment was observed between ice and other topical treatments. Providers found treatments using Buzzy® more difficult to administer. Given patient satisfaction and ease of administration, ice is a reasonable standard.

Rheumatology High Blood Pressure Protocol Reduces Disparities, But Delays Remain for External Primary Care.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To address high blood pressure (BP) in rheumatology patients, we previously implemented BP Connect, a brief staff-driven protocol to address high BP. Although timely follow-up and hypertension rates improved for patients with in-system primary care (PC), many receive PC and rheumatology care in separate health systems. In this cohort study, we compared rates of timely PC follow-up for high BP across-system health maintenance organizations (HMOs) before and after BP Connect implementation. METHODS: All adult patients with high rheumatology clinic BP and PC in that HMO were eligible. BP Connect's protocol engaged the staff in remeasuring high BP (≥140/90 mm Hg), advising cardiovascular disease risk, and connecting timely PC follow-up, which for patients with PC across system includes written follow-up instructions. After an eligible rheumatology visit, the next HMO PC visit with BP was used to determine rates and odds of timely follow-up before and after using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Across 1327 rheumatology visits with high BP and across-system PC (2013-2019), 951 occurred after 2015 BP Connect implementation; 400 had confirmed high BP. Primary care follow-up rose from 20.5% to 23.5%. The odds of timely PC BP follow-up insignificantly changed (odds ratio, 1.19; confidence interval, 0.85-1.68). For visits with Black patients, the odds of timely follow-up did significantly increase (1.95; confidence interval, 1.02-3.79). CONCLUSIONS: Timely follow-up for Black patients did improve, highlighting protocol interventions for more equitable health care. In contrast to our prior in-system study, BP Connect did not significantly improve follow-up with an across-system PC, indicating a need for direct scheduling. Future directions include piloting direct across-system scheduling.

Embedding an Education Intervention about Shared Decision Making into an RCT: Ensuring competency and fidelity.

Objective: To describe the outcomes of training nephrology clinicians and clinical research participants, to use the Best Case/Worst Case Communication intervention, for discussions about dialysis initiation for patients with life-limiting illness, during a randomized clinical trial to ensure competency, fidelity to the intervention, and adherence to study protocols and the intervention throughout the trial. Methods: We enrolled 68 nephrologists at ten study sites and randomized them to receive training or wait-list control. We collected copies of completed graphic aids (component of the intervention), used with study-enrolled patients, to measure fidelity and adherence. Results: We trained 34 of 36 nephrologists to competence and 27 completed the entire program. We received 60 graphic aids for study-enrolled patients for a 73% return rate in the intervention arm. The intervention fidelity score for the graphic aid reflected completion of all elements throughout the study. Conclusion: We successfully taught the Best Case/Worst Case Communication intervention to clinicians as research participants within a randomized clinical trial. Innovation: Decisions about dialysis are an opportunity to discuss prognosis and uncertainty in relation to consideration of prolonged life supporting therapy. Our study reveals a strategy to evaluate adherence to a communication intervention in real time during a clinical study.

"The Equipoise Ruler:" A National Survey on Surgeon Judgment about the Value of Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to understand professional norms regarding the value of surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Agreed-upon professional norms may improve surgical decision making by contextualizing the nature of surgical treatment for patients. However, the extent to which these norms exist among surgeons practicing in the US is not known. METHODS: We administered a survey with 30 exemplar cases asking surgeons to use their best judgement to place each case on a scale ranging from "Definitely would do this surgery" to "Definitely would not do this surgery." We then asked surgeons to repeat their assessments after providing responses from the first survey. We interviewed respondents to characterize their rationale. RESULTS: We received 580 responses, a response rate of 28.5%. For 19 of 30 cases there was consensus (≥60% agreement) about the value of surgery (range 63% - 99%). There was little within-case variation when the mode was for surgery and more variation when the mode was against surgery or equipoise. Exposure to peer response increased the number of cases with consensus. Women were more likely to endorse a non-operative approach when treatment had high mortality. Specialists were less likely to operate for salvage procedures. Surgeons noted their clinical practice was to withhold judgment and let patients decide despite their assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Professional judgment about the value of surgery exists along a continuum. While there is less variation in judgment for cases that are highly beneficial, consensus can be improved by exposure to the assessments of peers.

Identifying Young Adults at High Risk for Weight Gain Using Machine Learning.

INTRODUCTION: Weight gain among young adults continues to increase. Identifying adults at high risk for weight gain and intervening before they gain weight could have a major public health impact. Our objective was to develop and test electronic health record-based machine learning models to predict weight gain in young adults with overweight/class 1 obesity. METHODS: Seven machine learning models were assessed, including three regression models, random forest, single-layer neural network, gradient-boosted decision trees, and support vector machine (SVM) models. Four categories of predictors were included: 1) demographics; 2) obesity-related health conditions; 3) laboratory data and vital signs; and 4) neighborhood-level variables. The cohort was split 60:40 for model training and validation. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were calculated to determine model accuracy at predicting high-risk individuals, defined by ≥ 10% total body weight gain within 2 y. Variable importance was measured via generalized analysis of variance procedures. RESULTS: Of the 24,183 patients (mean [SD] age, 32.0 [6.3] y; 55.1% females) in the study, 14.2% gained ≥10% total body weight. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves varied from 0.557 (SVM) to 0.675 (gradient-boosted decision trees). Age, sex, and baseline body mass index were the most important predictors among the models except SVM and neural network. CONCLUSIONS: Our machine learning models performed similarly and had modest accuracy for identifying young adults at risk of weight gain. Future models may need to incorporate behavioral and/or genetic information to enhance model accuracy.

Identifying Patterns in Preoperative Communication about High-Risk Surgical Intervention: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Surgeons are entrusted with providing patients with information necessary for deliberation about surgical intervention. Ideally, surgical consultations generate a shared understanding of the treatment experience and determine whether surgery aligns with a patient's overall health goals. In-depth assessment of communication patterns might reveal opportunities to better achieve these objectives. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of audio-recorded consultations between surgeons and patients considering high-risk surgery. For 43 surgeons, we randomly selected 4 transcripts each of consultations with patients aged ≥60 y with at least 1 comorbidity. We developed a coding taxonomy, based on principles of informed consent and shared decision making, to categorize surgeon speech. We grouped transcripts by treatment plan and recorded the treatment goal. We used box plots, Sankey diagrams, and flow diagrams to characterize communication patterns. RESULTS: We included 169 transcripts, of which 136 discussed an oncologic problem and 33 considered a vascular (including cardiac and neurovascular) problem. At the median, surgeons devoted an estimated 8 min (interquartile range 5-13 min) to content specifically about intervention including surgery. In 85.5% of conversations, more than 40% of surgeon speech was consumed by technical descriptions of the disease or treatment. "Fix-it" language was used in 91.7% of conversations. In 79.9% of conversations, no overall goal of treatment was established or only a desire to cure or control cancer was expressed. Most conversations (68.6%) began with an explanation of the disease, followed by explanation of the treatment in 53.3%, and then options in 16.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Explanation of disease and treatment dominate surgical consultations, with limited time spent on patient goals. Changing the focus of these conversations may better support patients' deliberation about the value of surgery.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02623335. HIGHLIGHTS: In decision-making conversations about high-risk surgical intervention, surgeons emphasize description of the patient's disease and potential treatment, and the use of "fix-it" language is common.Surgeons dedicated limited time to eliciting patient preferences and goals, and 79.9% of conversations resulted in no explicit goal of treatment.Current communication practices may be inadequate to support deliberation about the value of surgery for individual patients and their families.

The influence of anatomic stage and receptor status on first recurrence for breast cancer within 5 years (AFT-01).

BACKGROUND: Risk-stratified follow-up guidelines that account for the absolute risk and timing of recurrence may improve the quality and efficiency of breast cancer follow-up. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship of anatomic stage and receptor status with timing of the first recurrence for patients with local-regional breast cancer and generate risk-stratified follow-up recommendations. METHODS: The authors conducted a secondary analysis of 8007 patients with stage I-III breast cancer who enrolled in nine Alliance legacy clinical trials from 1997 to 2013 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02171078). Patients who received standard-of-care therapy were included. Patients who were missing stage or receptor status were excluded. The primary outcome was days from the earliest treatment start date to the date of first recurrence. The primary explanatory variable was anatomic stage. The analysis was stratified by receptor type. Cox proportional-hazards regression models produced cumulative probabilities of recurrence. A dynamic programming algorithm approach was used to optimize the timing of follow-up intervals based on the timing of recurrence events. RESULTS: The time to first recurrence varied significantly between receptor types (p < .0001). Within each receptor type, stage influenced the time to recurrence (p < .0001). The risk of recurrence was highest and occurred earliest for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative/progesterone receptor (PR)-negative/Her2neu-negative tumors (stage III; 5-year probability of recurrence, 45.5%). The risk of recurrence was lower for ER-positive/PR-positive/Her2neu-positive tumors (stage III; 5-year probability of recurrence, 15.3%), with recurrences distributed over time. Model-generated follow-up recommendations by stage and receptor type were created. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports considering both anatomic stage and receptor status in follow-up recommendations. The implementation of risk-stratified guidelines based on these data has the potential to improve the quality and efficiency of follow-up.

Reexamining Time From Breast Cancer Diagnosis to Primary Breast Surgery.

Importance: Although longer times from breast cancer diagnosis to primary surgery have been associated with worse survival outcomes, the specific time point after which it is disadvantageous to have surgery is unknown. Identifying an acceptable time to surgery would help inform patients, clinicians, and the health care system. Objective: To examine the association between time from breast cancer diagnosis to surgery (in weeks) and overall survival and to describe factors associated with surgical delay. The hypothesis that there is an association between time to surgery and overall survival was tested. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a case series study that used National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from female individuals diagnosed with breast cancer from 2010 to 2014 (with 5-year follow-up to 2019). The NCDB uses hospital registry data from greater than 1500 Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities, accounting for 70% of all cancers diagnosed in the US. Included participants were females 18 years or older with stage I to III ductal or lobular breast cancer who underwent surgery as the first course of treatment. Patients with prior breast cancer, missing receptor information, neoadjuvant or experimental therapy, or who were diagnosed with breast cancer on the date of their primary surgery were excluded. Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate factors associated with overall survival. Patients were censored at death or last follow-up. Covariates included age and tumor characteristics. Multinomial regression was performed to identify factors associated with longer time to surgery, using surgery 30 days or less from diagnosis as the reference group. Data were analyzed from March 15 to July 7, 2022. Exposures: Time to receipt of primary breast surgery. Measures: The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Results: The final cohort included 373 334 patients (median [IQR] age, 61 [51-70] years). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, time to surgery 9 weeks (57-63 days) or later after diagnosis was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.23; P < .001) compared with surgery between 0 to 4 weeks (1-28 days). By multinomial regression, factors associated with longer times to surgery (using surgery 1-30 days from diagnosis as a reference) included the following: (1) younger age, eg, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for patients 45 years or younger undergoing surgery 31 to 60 days from diagnosis was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.28-1.38); 61 to 74 days, 1.64 (95% CI, 1.52-1.78); and greater than 74 days, 1.58 (95% CI, 1.46-1.71); (2) uninsured or Medicaid status, eg, the adjusted OR for patients with Medicaid undergoing surgery 31 to 60 days from diagnosis was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.30-1.39); 61 to 74 days, 2.13 (95% CI, 2.01-2.26); and greater than 74 days, 3.42 (95% CI, 3.25-3.61); and (3) lower neighborhood household income, eg, the adjusted OR for patients with household income less than $38,000 undergoing surgery 31 to 60 days from diagnosis was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.02-1.07); 61 to 74 days, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.15-1.27); and greater than 74 days, 1.53 (95% CI, 1.46-1.61). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this case series study suggest the use of 8 weeks or less as a quality metric for time to surgery. Time to surgery of greater than 8 weeks may partly be associated with disadvantageous social determinants of health.

Greater patient sharing between hospitals is associated with better outcomes for transferred emergency general surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Access to emergency surgical care has declined as the rural workforce has decreased. Interhospital transfers of patients are increasingly necessary, and care coordination across settings is critical to quality care. We characterize the role of repeated hospital patient sharing in outcomes of transfers for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients. METHODS: A multicenter study of Wisconsin inpatient acute care hospital stays that involved transfer of EGS patients using data from the Wisconsin Hospital Association, a statewide hospital discharge census for 2016 to 2018. We hypothesized that higher proportion of patients transferred between hospitals would result in better outcomes. We examined the association between the proportion of EGS patients transferred between hospitals and patient outcomes, including in-hospital morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Additional variables included hospital organizational characteristics and patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred eighteen hospitals transferred 3,197 emergency general surgery patients over the 2-year study period; 1,131 experienced in-hospital morbidity, mortality, or extended length of stay (>75th percentile). Patients were 62 years old on average, 50% were female, and 5% were non-White. In the mixed-effects model, hospitals' proportion of patients shared was associated with lower odds of an in-hospital complication; specifically, when the proportion of patients shared between two hospitals doubled, the relative odds of any outcome changed by 0.85. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest the importance of emergent relationships between hospital dyads that share patients in quality outcomes. Transfer protocols should account for established efficiencies, familiarity, and coordination between hospitals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Best Case/Worst Case: protocol for a multisite randomised clinical trial of a scenario planning intervention for patients with kidney failure.

INTRODUCTION: Given the burdens of treatment and poor prognosis, older adults with kidney failure would benefit from improved decision making and palliative care to clarify goals, address symptoms, and reduce unwanted procedures. Best Case/Worst Case (BC/WC) is a communication tool that uses scenario planning to support patients' decision making. This article describes the protocol for a multisite, cluster randomised trial to test the effect of training nephrologists to use the BC/WC communication tool on patient receipt of palliative care, and quality of life and communication. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We are enrolling attending nephrologists, at 10 study sites in the USA, who see outpatients with advanced chronic kidney disease considering dialysis. We aim to enrol 320 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≤24 mL/min/1.73 m2 who are age 60 and older and have a predicted survival of 18 months or less. Nephrologists will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive training to use the communication tool (intervention) at study initiation or after study completion (wait-list control). Patients in the intervention group will receive care from a nephrologist trained to use the BC/WC communication tool. Patients in the control group will receive usual care. Using chart review and surveys of patients and caregivers, we will test the efficacy of the BC/WC intervention with receipt of palliative care as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include intensity of treatment at the end of life, the effect of the intervention on quality of communication (QOC) between nephrologists and patients (using the QOC scale), the change in quality of life (using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale) and receipt of dialysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approvals have been granted by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Wisconsin (ID: 2022-0193), with each study site ceding review to the primary IRB. All nephrologists will be consented and given a copy of the consent form. No patients or caregivers will be recruited or consented until their nephrology provider has chosen to participate in the study. Results will be disseminated via submission for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and at national meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04466865.

Increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients' engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making through a shared decision-making intervention (A231701CD): protocol for a cluster randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Socioeconomic disparities for breast cancer surgical care exist. Although the aetiology of the observed socioeconomic disparities is likely multifactorial, patient engagement during the surgical consult is critical. Shared decision-making may reduce health disparities by addressing barriers to patient engagement in decision-making that disproportionately impact socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. In this trial, we test the impact of a decision aid on increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients' engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multisite randomised trial is conducted through 10 surgical clinics within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). We plan a stepped-wedge design with clinics randomised to the time of transition from usual care to the decision aid arm. Study participants are female patients, aged ≥18 years, with newly diagnosed stage 0-III breast cancer who are planning breast surgery. Data collection includes a baseline surgeon survey, baseline patient survey, audio-recording of the surgeon-patient consultation, a follow-up patient survey and medical record data review. Interviews and focus groups are conducted with a subset of patients, surgeons and clinic stakeholders. The effectiveness of the decision aid at increasing patient engagement (primary outcome) is evaluated using generalised linear mixed-effects models. The extent to which the effect of the decision aid intervention on patient engagement is mediated through the mitigation of barriers is tested in joint linear structural equation models. Qualitative interviews explore how barriers impact engagement, especially for socioeconomically disadvantaged women. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been approved by the National Cancer Institute Central Institutional Review Board, and Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained. We plan to disseminate the findings through journal publications and national meetings, including the NCORP network. Our findings will advance the science of medical decision-making with the potential to reduce socioeconomic health disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03766009).

Diagnostic Accuracy of Fine-Needle Biopsy in the Detection of Thyroid Malignancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Fine-needle biopsy (FNB) became a critical part of thyroid nodule evaluation in the 1970s. It is not clear how diagnostic accuracy of FNB has changed over time. Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis estimating the accuracy of thyroid FNB for diagnosis of malignancy in adults with a newly diagnosed thyroid nodule and to characterize changes in accuracy over time. Data Sources: PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from 1975 to 2020 using search terms related to FNB accuracy in the thyroid. Study Selection: English-language reports of cohort studies or randomized trials of adult patients undergoing thyroid FNB with sample size of 20 or greater and using a reference standard of surgical histopathology or clinical follow-up were included. Articles that examined only patients with known thyroid disease or focused on accuracy of novel adjuncts, such as molecular tests, were excluded. Two investigators screened each article and resolved conflicts by consensus. A total of 36 of 1023 studies met selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The MOOSE guidelines were used for data abstraction and assessing data quality and validity. Two investigators abstracted data using a standard form. Studies were grouped into epochs by median data collection year (1975 to 1990, 1990 to 2000, 2000 to 2010, and 2010 to 2020). Data were pooled using a bivariate mixed-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was accuracy of FNB for diagnosis of malignancy. Accuracy was hypothesized to increase in later time periods, a hypothesis formulated prior to data collection. Results: Of 16 597 included patients, 12 974 (79.2%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 47.3 (12.9) years. The sensitivity of FNB was 85.6% (95% CI, 79.9-89.5), the specificity was 71.4% (95% CI, 61.1-79.8), the positive likelihood ratio was 3.0 (95% CI, 2.3-4.1), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.2 (95% CI, 0.2-0.3). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 86.1%. Epoch was not significantly associated with accuracy. None of the available covariates could explain observed heterogeneity. Conclusions and Relevance: Accuracy of thyroid FNB has not significantly changed over time. Important developments in technique, preparation, and interpretation may have occurred too heterogeneously to capture a consistent uptrend over time. FNB remains a reliable test for thyroid cancer diagnosis.

Association between neighborhood food environments and bariatric surgery outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Individual characteristics associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery are well established, but the neighborhood characteristics that influence outcomes are unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine if neighborhood characteristics, including social determinants and lifestyle characteristics, were associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery. SETTING: Single university healthcare system, United States. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery from 2008 to 2017 and had at least 1 year of follow-up data were included. Patient-level demographics and neighborhood-level social determinants (area deprivation index, urbanicity, and walkability) and lifestyle factors (organic food use, fresh fruit/vegetable consumption, diet to maintain weight, soda consumption, and exercise) were analyzed. Median regression with percent total body weight (%TBW) loss as the outcome was applied to examine factors associated with weight loss after surgery. RESULTS: Of the 647 patients who met inclusion criteria, the average follow-up period was 3.1 years, and the mean %TBW loss at the follow-up was 22%. In adjusted median regression analyses, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was associated with greater %TBW loss (11.22%, 95% confidence interval [8.96, 13.48]) compared to sleeve, while longer follow-up time (-2.42% TBW loss per year, 95% confidence interval [-4.63, -0.20]) and a preoperative diagnosis of diabetes (-1.00% TBW loss, 95% confidence interval [-1.55, -0.44]) were associated with less. None of the 8 neighborhood level characteristics was associated with weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Patient characteristics rather than neighborhood-level social determinants and lifestyle factors were associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery in our cohort of bariatric surgery patients. Patients from socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods can achieve excellent weight loss after bariatric surgery.

Barriers to breast reconstruction for socioeconomically disadvantaged women.

PURPOSE: Socioeconomic disparities in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction exist. Key informants have suggested that finding providers who accept Medicaid insurance and longer travel time to a plastic surgeon are important barriers. Our objective was to assess the relationship between these factors and reconstruction for socioeconomically disadvantaged women in Wisconsin. METHODS: We identified women < 75 years of age with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent mastectomy using the Wisconsin Cancer Reporting System. Women in the most disadvantaged state-based tertile of the Area Deprivation Index were included (n = 1809). Geocoding determined turn-by-turn drive time from women's address to the nearest accredited Commission on Cancer or National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers. Multivariable logistic regression determined the relationship between reconstruction, Medicaid, and travel time, controlling for patient factors known to impact reconstruction. Average adjusted predicted probabilities of receiving reconstruction were calculated. RESULTS: Most patients had early-stage breast cancer (51% stage 0/I) and 15.2% had Medicaid. 37% of women underwent reconstruction. Socioeconomically disadvantaged women with Medicaid (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.84) and longer travel times (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.0) were less likely to receive reconstruction. Patients with the lowest predicted probability of reconstruction were those with Medicaid who lived furthest from a plastic surgeon. CONCLUSION: Among socioeconomically disadvantaged women, Medicaid and travel remained associated with lower rates of reconstruction. Further work will explore opportunities to improve access to reconstruction for women with Medicaid. This is particularly challenging as it may require socioeconomically disadvantaged women to travel further to receive care.

Obesity and "obesity-related" cancers: are there body mass index cut-points?

BACKGROUND: Despite compelling links between excess body weight and cancer, body mass index (BMI) cut-points, or thresholds above which cancer incidence increased, have not been identified. The objective of this study was to determine if BMI cut-points exist for 14 obesity-related cancers. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients 18-75 years old were included if they had ≥2 clinical encounters with BMI measurements in the electronic health record (EHR) at a single academic medical center from 2008 to 2018. Patients who were pregnant, had a history of cancer, or had undergone bariatric surgery were excluded. Adjusted logistic regression was performed to identify cancers that were associated with increasing BMI. For those cancers, BMI cut-points were calculated using adjusted quantile regression for cancer incidence at 80% sensitivity. Logistic and quantile regression models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and smoking status. RESULTS: A total of 7079 cancer patients (mean age 58.5 years, mean BMI 30.5 kg/m2) and 270,441 non-cancer patients (mean age 43.8 years, mean BMI 28.8 kg/m2) were included in the study. In adjusted logistic regression analyses, statistically significant associations were identified between increasing BMI and the incidence of kidney, thyroid, and uterine cancer. BMI cut-points were identified for kidney (26.3 kg/m2) and uterine (26.9 kg/m2) cancer. CONCLUSIONS: BMI cut-points that accurately predicted development kidney and uterine cancer occurred in the overweight category. Analysis of multi-institutional EHR data may help determine if these relationships are generalizable to other health care settings. If they are, incorporation of BMI into the screening algorithms for these cancers may be warranted.

Surgeon Use of Shared Decision-making for Older Adults Considering Major Surgery: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Because major surgery carries significant risks for older adults with comorbid conditions, shared decision-making is recommended to ensure patients receive care consistent with their goals. However, it is unknown how often shared decision-making is used for these patients. Objective: To describe the use of shared decision-making during discussions about major surgery with older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a secondary analysis of conversations audio recorded during a randomized clinical trial of a question prompt list. Data were collected from June 1, 2016, to November 31, 2018, from 43 surgeons and 446 patients 60 years or older with at least 1 comorbidity at outpatient surgical clinics at 5 academic centers. Interventions: Patients received a question prompt list brochure that contained questions they could ask a surgeon. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 5-domain Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-making (OPTION5) score (range, 0-100, with higher scores indicating greater shared decision-making) was used to measure shared decision-making. Results: A total of 378 surgical consultations were analyzed (mean [SD] patient age, 71.9 [7.2] years; 206 [55%] male; 312 [83%] White). The mean (SD) OPTION5 score was 34.7 (20.6) and was not affected by the intervention. The mean (SD) score in the group receiving the question prompt list was 36.7 (21.2); in the control group, the mean (SD) score was 32.9 (19.9) (effect estimate, 3.80; 95% CI, -0.30 to 8.00; P = .07). Individual surgeon use of shared decision-making varied greatly, with a lowest median score of 10 (IQR, 10-20) to a high of 65 (IQR, 55-80). Lower-performing surgeons had little variation in OPTION5 scores, whereas high-performing surgeons had wide variation. Use of shared decision-making increased when surgeons appeared reluctant to operate (effect estimate, 7.40; 95% CI, 2.60-12.20; P = .003). Although longer conversations were associated with slightly higher OPTION5 scores (effect estimate, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88; P < .001), 57% of high-scoring transcripts were 26 minutes long or less. On multivariable analysis, patient age and gender, patient education, surgeon age, and surgeon gender were not significantly associated with OPTION5 scores. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that although shared decision-making is important to support the preferences of older adults considering major surgery, surgeon use of shared decision-making is highly variable. Skillful shared decision-making can be done in less than 30 minutes; however, surgeons who engage in high-scoring shared decision-making are more likely to do so when surgical intervention is less obviously beneficial for the patient. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02623335.

Promoting patient engagement during care transitions after surgery using mobile technology: Lessons learned from the MobiMD pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Poorly coordinated transitions of care in complex abdominal surgery patients contribute to frequent hospital readmissions and inflated healthcare spending. Mobile health (mHealth) transitional care technologies may reduce surgical readmissions yet remain understudied in high-risk surgical populations. METHODS: We conducted a single-group, prepost study of a mHealth transitional care app in 50 complex surgical patients. Eligible patients were adults undergoing complex abdominal surgery in the divisions of Surgical Oncology and Colorectal Surgery. The main outcome was app engagement, calculated by notification response rate (number of participant-entered datapoints divided by the total number of app-requested datapoints) over the 30-day postoperative period. Secondary outcomes included changes in engagement over time and by individual app feature. RESULTS: A total of 85% (50/59) of eligible patients enrolled. Most participants were male (58%, n = 29), and mean age was 50 years (range 24-80 years). Overall notification response rate was 28%. Among the 58% of participants (29/50) who engaged with the app at least once after discharge (app users), the average notification response rate was 45%. The mean notification response rate among app users decreased over time from 50% to 32% between weeks 1 and 4 after hospital discharge. Engagement with individual app features ranged from 48-81%, with highest engagement for symptom reports and lowest engagement for wound care instructions. CONCLUSION: mHealth transitional care is feasible in complex surgical patients using only patients' existing smart devices. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine the impact on hospital readmissions, surgical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and overall resource utilization.

Treatment of carotid stenosis in asymptomatic, nonoctogenarian, standard risk patients with stenting versus endarterectomy trials.

OBJECTIVE: Asymptomatic carotid stenosis is the most frequent indication for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the United States. Published trials and guidelines support CEA indications in selected patients with longer projected survival and when periprocedural complications are low. Transfemoral carotid artery stenting with embolic protection (CAS) is a newer treatment option. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes in asymptomatic, nonoctogenarian patients treated with CAS vs CEA. METHODS: Patient-level data was analyzed from 2544 subjects with ≥70% asymptomatic carotid stenosis who were randomized to CAS or CEA in addition to standard medical therapy. One trial enrolled 1091 (548 CAS, 543 CEA) and another enrolled 1453 (1089 CAS, 364 CEA) asymptomatic patients less than 80 years old (upper age eligibility). Independent neurologic assessment and routine cardiac enzyme screening were performed. The prespecified, primary composite endpoint was any stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period or ipsilateral stroke within 4 years after randomization. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between CAS and CEA (5.3% vs 5.1%; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-1.5; P = .91). Periprocedural rates for the components are (CAS vs CEA): any stroke (2.7% vs 1.5%; P = .07), myocardial infarction (0.6% vs 1.7%; P = .01), death (0.1% vs 0.2%; P = .62), and any stroke or death (2.7% vs 1.6%; P = .07). After this period, the rates of ipsilateral stroke were similar (2.3% vs 2.2%; P = .97). CONCLUSIONS: In a pooled analysis of two large randomized trials of CAS and CEA in asymptomatic, nonoctogenarian patients, CAS achieves comparable short- and long-term results to CEA.