Mental health comorbidities and cost/utilization outcomes in head and neck cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Examine the relationship between mental health comorbidities and health services outcomes in non-elderly adults with head and neck cancer (HNC). DESIGN: Retrospective, cross-sectional. SAMPLE: Non-elderly adults with a primary diagnosis of HNC in U.S. Department of Defense (TRICARE) administrative claims data for fiscal years (FY) 2007-2014. METHODS: Linear regression and generalized linear models were used to examine predictors of reimbursed cost and healthcare utilization, respectively. FINDINGS: On average, there were 2944 HNC patients each year, the majority age 55-64, male, military retirees or family members of retirees, cared for in civilian facilities, and residing in the U.S. southern region. Between FY2007 and FY2014, there were slight increases in prevalence rates for diagnosed depression (12.4%-13.1%), anxiety (8.2%-11.9%), adjustment disorders (3.7%-5.8%), and drug use disorders (10.3%-19.4%), and a slight decrease in alcohol use disorders (12.3%-11.4%). In the cost regression model, depression and anxiety were the seventh and eighth strongest predictors (p < .001), behind hospice use, treatment modalities, chronic physical conditions, and tobacco use. In the utilization regression models, depression, adjustment disorder, and anxiety ranked seventh, ninth, and eleventh as the strongest predictors for the number of ambulatory visits; anxiety, depression and substance use disorder ranked fifth, sixth, and eighth in the model examining predictors of the number of annual hospitalizations; and anxiety and depression ranked fifth and sixth in the model examining predictors of the annual number of bed days. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence that mental health comorbidities impact cost and utilization among HNC patients, independent of other factors. Implications for Psychosocial Providers or Policy: Addressing mental health comorbidities among HNC patients may reduce cost and improve resource efficiency.

Improving the safety and quality of cancer care.

The cancer community is increasingly interested in improving its safety and quality. Improvement will be driven by the expansion of safety and quality research and by a commitment to publish studies that advance high-quality, safe cancer care. Cancer 2017;123:549-550. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Assessing the usability by clinicians of VISION: A hierarchical display of patient-collected physiological information to clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The inability of patients to accurately and completely recount their clinical status between clinic visits reduces the clinician's ability to properly manage their patients. One way to improve this situation is to collect objective patient information while the patients are at home and display the collected multi-day clinical information in parallel on a single screen, highlighting threshold violations for each channel, and allowing the viewer to drill down to any analog signal on the same screen, while maintaining the overall physiological context of the patient. All this would be accomplished in a way that was easy for the clinician to view and use. METHODS: Patients used five mobile devices to collect six heart failure-related clinical variables: body weight, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate, blood oxygen saturation, physical activity, and subjective input. Fourteen clinicians practicing in a heart failure clinic rated the display using the System Usability Scale that, for acceptability, had an expected mean of 68 (SD, 12.5). In addition, we calculated the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient of the clinician responses using a two-way, mixed effects model, ICC (3,1). RESULTS: We developed a single-screen temporal hierarchical display (VISION) that summarizes the patient's home monitoring activities between clinic visits. The overall System Usability Scale score was 92 (95% CI, 87-97), p < 0.0001; the ICC was 0.89 (CI, 0.79-0.97), p < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: Clinicians consistently found VISION to be highly usable. To our knowledge, this is the first single-screen, parallel variable, temporal hierarchical display of both continuous and discrete information acquired by patients at home between clinic visits that presents clinically significant information at the point of care in a manner that is usable by clinicians.

Radiation exposure and cost influence physician medical image decision making: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 20%-40% of advanced medical imaging in the United States is unnecessary, resulting in patient overexposure to radiation and increasing the cost of care. Previous imaging utilization studies have focused on clinical appropriateness. An important contributor to excessive use of advanced imaging may be a physician "knowledge gap" regarding the safety and cost of the tests. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether safety and cost information will change physician medical image decision making. RESEARCH DESIGN: Double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Following standardized case presentation, physicians made an initial imaging choice. This was followed by the presentation of guidelines, radiation exposure and health risk, and cost information. RESULTS: Approximately half (57 of 112, 50.9%) of participants initially selected computed tomography (CT). When presented with guideline recommendations, participants did not modify their initial imaging choice (P=0.197). A significant reduction (56.3%, P<0.001) in CT ordering occurred after presentation of radiation exposure/health risk information; ordering changed to magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound (US). A significant reduction (48.3%, P<0.001) in CT and magnetic resonance imaging ordering occurred after presentation of Medicare reimbursement information; ordering changed to US. The majority of physicians (31 of 40, 77.5%) selecting US never modified their ordering. No significant relationship between physician demographics and decision making was observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that physician decision making can be influenced by safety and cost information and the order in which information is provided to physicians can affect their decisions.

Responses of physicians to an objective safety and quality knowledge test: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: For physicians to practice safe high quality medicine they must have sufficient safety and quality knowledge. Although a great deal is known about the safety and quality perceptions, attitudes and beliefs of physicians, little is known about their safety and quality knowledge. This study tested the objective safety and quality knowledge of practicing US primary care physicians. DESIGN: Cross-sectional objective test of safety and quality knowledge. SETTING: Primary care physicians practicing in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Study consisted of 518 US practicing primary care physicians who answered an email invitation. Fifty-four percent were family medicine and 46% were internal medicine physicians.The response rate was 66%. INTERVENTION: The physicians took a 24-question multiple-choice test over the internet. OUTCOME: The outcome was the percent correct. RESULTS: The average number of correct answers was 11.4 (SD, 2.69), 48% correct. Three common clinical vignettes questions were answered correctly by 45% of the physicians. Five common radiation exposures questions were answered correctly by 40% of the physicians. Seven common healthcare quality and safety questions were answered correctly by 43% of the physicians. Seven Donabedian's model of structure, process and outcome measure questions were answered correctly by 67% of the physicians. Two Institute of Medicine's definitions of quality and safety questions were answered correctly by 19.5% of the physicians. CONCLUSION: Forty-eight per cent of the physicians' answers to the objective safety and quality questions were correct. To our knowledge, this is the first assessment of the objective safety and quality knowledge of practicing US primary care physicians.

Cost and Healthcare Utilization Among Non-Elderly Head and Neck Cancer Patients in the Military Health System, a Single-Payer Universal Health Care Model.

INTRODUCTION: Examining costs and utilization in a single-payer universal health care system provides information on fiscal and resource burdens associated with head and neck cancer (HNC). Here, we examine trends in the Department of Defense (DoD) HNC population with respect to: (1) reimbursed annual costs and (2) patterns and predictors of health care utilization in military only, civilian only, and both systems of care (mixed model). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted using TRICARE claims data from fiscal years 2007 through 2014 for reimbursement of ambulatory, inpatient, and pharmacy charges. The study was approved by the Defense Health Agency Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties as exempt from institutional review board full review. The population was all beneficiaries, age 18-64, with a primary ICD-9 diagnosis of HNC, on average, 2,944 HNC cases per year. The outcomes of regression models were total reimbursed health care cost, and counts of ambulatory visits, hospitalizations, and bed days. The predictors were fiscal year, demographic variables, hospice use, type and geographic region of TRICARE enrollment, use of military or civilian care or mixed use, cancer treatment modalities, the number of physical and mental health comorbid conditions, and tobacco use. A priori, null hypotheses were assumed. RESULTS: Per annual average, 61% of the HNC population was age 55-64, and 69% were males. About 6% accessed military facilities only for all health care, 60% accessed civilian only, and 34% accessed both military and civilian facilities. Patients who only accessed military care had earlier stage disease as indicated by rates of single modality treatment and hospice use; military care only and mixed use had similar rates of combination treatment and hospice use. The average cost per patient per year was $14,050 for civilian care only, $13,036 for military care only, and $29,338 for mixed use of both systems. The strongest predictors of higher cost were chemotherapy, radiation therapy, head and neck surgery, hospice care, and mixed-use care. The strongest predictors of health care utilization were chemotherapy, use of hospice, the number of physical and mental health comorbidities, radiation therapy, head and neck surgery, and system of care. CONCLUSIONS: To a single payer, the use of a single system of care exclusively among HNC patients is more cost-effective than use of a mixed-use system. The results suggest an over-utilization of ambulatory care services when both military and civilian care are accessed. Further investigation is needed to assess coordination between systems of care and improved efficiencies with respect to the cost and apparent over-utilization of health care services.

Predicting Clinical Outcomes Using Molecular Biomarkers.

Over the past 20 years, there has been an exponential increase in the number of biomarkers. At the last count, there were 768,259 papers indexed in PubMed.gov directly related to biomarkers. Although many of these papers claim to report clinically useful molecular biomarkers, embarrassingly few are currently in clinical use. It is suggested that a failure to properly understand, clinically assess, and utilize molecular biomarkers has prevented their widespread adoption in treatment, in comparative benefit analyses, and their integration into individualized patient outcome predictions for clinical decision-making and therapy. A straightforward, general approach to understanding how to predict clinical outcomes using risk, diagnostic, and prognostic molecular biomarkers is presented. In the future, molecular biomarkers will drive advances in risk, diagnosis, and prognosis, they will be the targets of powerful molecular therapies, and they will individualize and optimize therapy. Furthermore, clinical predictions based on molecular biomarkers will be displayed on the clinician's screen during the physician-patient interaction, they will be an integral part of physician-patient-shared decision-making, and they will improve clinical care and patient outcomes.

The adoption of an electronic health record did not improve A1c values in Type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: A major justification for the clinical adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) was the expectation that it would improve the quality of medical care. No longitudinal study has tested this assumption. OBJECTIVE: We used hemoglobin A1c, a recognized clinical quality measure directly related to diabetes outcomes, to assess the effect of EHR use on clinical quality. METHODS: We performed a five-and-one-half-year multicentre longitudinal retrospective study of the A1c values of 537 type 2 diabetic patients. The same patients had to have been seen on at least three occasions: once approximately six months prior to EHR adoption (before-EHR), once approximately six monthsafter EHR adoption (after-EHR) and once approximately five years after EHR adoption (five-years), for a total of 1,611 notes. RESULTS: The overall mean confidence interval (CI) A1c values for the before- EHR, after-EHR and five-years were 7.07 (6.91 - 7.23), 7.33 (7.14 - 7.52) and 7.19 (7.06 - 7.32), respectively. There was a small but significant increase in A1c values between before-EHR and after-EHR, p = .04; there were no other significant differences. There was a significant decrease in notes missing at least one A1c value, from 42% before-EHR to 16% five-years (p < .001). CONCLUSION: We found that based on patient's A1c values, EHRs did not improve the clinical quality of diabetic care in six months and five years after EHR adoption. To our knowledge, this is the first longitudinal study to directly assess the relationshipbetween the use of an EHR and clinical quality.

Electronic physiologic and subjective data acquisition in home-dwelling heart failure patients: An assessment of patient use and perception of usability.

BACKGROUND: The current approach to the outpatient management of heart failure involves patients recollecting what has happened to them since their last clinic visit. But patients' recollection of their symptoms may not be sufficiently accurate to optimally manage their disease. Most of what is known about heart failure is related to patients' diurnal symptoms and activities. Some mobile electronic technologies can operate continuously to collect data from the time patients go to bed until they get up in the morning. We were therefore interested to evaluate if patients would use a system of selected patient-facing devices to collect physiologic and subjective state data in and around the patients' period of sleep, and if there were differences in device use and perceptions of usability at the device level METHODS: This descriptive observational study of home-dwelling patients with heart failure, between 21 and 90 years of age, enrolled in an outpatient heart failure clinic was conducted between December 2014 and June 2015. Patients received five devices, namely, body weight scale, blood pressure device, an iPad-based subjective states assessment, pulse oximeter, and actigraph, to collect their physiologic (body weight, blood pressure, heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, and physical activity) and subjective state data (symptoms and subjective states) at home for the next six consecutive nights. Use was defined as the ratio of observed use over expected use, where 1.0 is observed equals expected. Usability was determined by the overall System Usability Scale score. RESULTS: Participants were 39 clinical heart failure patients, mean age 68.1 (SD, 12.3), 72% male, 62% African American. The ratio of observed over expected use for the body weight scale, blood pressure device, iPad application, pulse oximeter and actigraph was 0.8, 1.0, 1.1, 0.9, and 1.9, respectively. The mean overall System Usability Scale score for each device were 84.5, 89.7, 85.7, 87.6, and 85.2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were able to use all of the devices and they rated the usability of all the devices higher than expected. Our study provides support for at-home patient-collected physiologic and subjective state data. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the use and usability of electronic objective and subjective data collection devices in heart failure patients' homes overnight.

Epidemiology and statistical methods in prediction of patient outcome.

Substantial gaps exist in the data of the assessment of risk and prognosis that limit our understanding of the complex mechanisms that contribute to the greatest cancer epidemic, prostate cancer, of our time. This report was prepared by an international multidisciplinary committee of the World Health Organization to address contemporary issues of epidemiology and statistical methods in prostate cancer, including a summary of current risk assessment methods and prognostic factors. Emphasis was placed on the relative merits of each of the statistical methods available. We concluded that: 1. An international committee should be created to guide the assessment and validation of molecular biomarkers. The goal is to achieve more precise identification of those who would benefit from treatment. 2. Prostate cancer is a predictable disease despite its biologic heterogeneity. However, the accuracy of predicting it must be improved. We expect that more precise statistical methods will supplant the current staging system. The simplicity and intuitive ease of using the current staging system must be balanced against the serious compromise in accuracy for the individual patient. 3. The most useful new statistical approaches will integrate molecular biomarkers with existing prognostic factors to predict conditional life expectancy (i.e. the expected remaining years of a patient's life) and take into account all-cause mortality.