Latent Class Analysis of Social Needs in Medicaid Population and Its Impact on Risk Adjustment Models.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of US states are implementing programs to address the social needs (SNs) of their Medicaid populations through managed care contracts. Incorporating SN might also improve risk adjustment methods used to reimburse Medicaid providers. OBJECTIVES: Identify classes of SN present within the Medicaid population and evaluate the performance improvement in risk adjustment models of health care utilization and cost after incorporating SN classes. RESEARCH DESIGN: A secondary analysis of Medicaid patients during the years 2018 and 2019. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify SN classes. To evaluate the impact of SN classes on measures of hospitalization, emergency (ED) visits, and costs, logistic and linear regression modeling for concurrent and prospective years was used. Model performance was assessed before and after incorporating these SN classes to base models controlling for demographics and comorbidities. SUBJECTS: 262,325 Medicaid managed care program patients associated with a large urban academic medical center. RESULTS: 7.8% of the study population had at least one SN, with the most prevalent being related to safety (3.9%). Four classes of SN were determined to be optimal based on LCA, including stress-related needs, safety-related needs, access to health care-related needs, and socioeconomic status-related needs. The addition of SN classes improved the performance of concurrent base models' AUC (0.61 vs. 0.58 for predicting ED visits and 0.61 vs. 0.58 for projecting hospitalizations). CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating SN clusters significantly improved risk adjustment models of health care utilization and costs in the study population. Further investigation into the predictive value of SN for costs and utilization in different Medicaid populations is merited.

Assessing Patient and Community-Level Social Factors; The Synergistic Effect of Social Needs and Social Determinants of Health on Healthcare Utilization at a Multilevel Academic Healthcare System.

We investigated the role of both individual-level social needs and community-level social determinants of health (SDOH) in explaining emergency department (ED) utilization rates. We also assessed the potential synergies between the two levels of analysis and their combined effect on patterns of ED visits. We extracted electronic health record (EHR) data between July 2016 and June 2020 for 1,308,598 unique Maryland residents who received care at Johns Hopkins Health System, of which 28,937 (2.2%) patients had at least one documented social need. There was a negative correlation between median household income in a neighborhood with having a social need such as financial resource strain, food insecurity, and residential instability (correlation coefficient: -0.05, -0.01, and - 0.06, p = 0, respectively). In a multilevel model with random effects after adjusting for other factors, living in a more disadvantaged neighborhood was found to be significantly associated with ED utilization statewide and within Baltimore City (OR: 1.005, 95% CI: 1.003-1.007 and 1.020, 95% CI: 1.017-1.022, respectively). However, individual-level social needs appeared to enhance the statewide effect of living in a more disadvantaged neighborhood with the OR for the interaction term between social needs and SDOH being larger, and more positive, than SDOH alone (OR: 1.012, 95% CI: 1.011-1.014). No such moderation was found in Baltimore City. To our knowledge, this study is one of the first attempts by a major academic healthcare system to assess the combined impact of patient-level social needs in association with community-level SDOH on healthcare utilization and can serve as a baseline for future studies using EHR data linked to population-level data to assess such synergistic association.

Early relaxation of community mitigation policies and risk of COVID-19 resurgence in the United States.

This study aimed to assess the impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) prevalence in the United States in the week leading to the relaxation of the stay-at-home orders (SAH) on future prevalence across states that implemented different SAH policies. We used data on the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases as of August 21, 2020 on county level. We classified states into four groups based on the 7-day change in prevalence and the state's approach to SAH policy. The groups included: (1) High Change (19 states; 7-day prevalence change ≥50th percentile), (2) Low Change (19 states; 7-day prevalence change <50th percentile), (3) No SAH (11 states: did not adopt SAH order), and (4) No SAH End (2 states: did not relax SAH order). We performed regression modeling assessing the association between change in prevalence at the time of SAH order relaxation and COVID-19 prevalence days after the relaxation of SAH order for four selected groups. After adjusting for other factors, compared to the High Change group, counties in the Low Change group had 33.8 (per 100,000 population) fewer cases (standard error (SE): 19.8, p < 0.001) 7 days after the relaxation of SAH order and the difference was larger by time passing. On August 21, 2020, the No SAH End group had 383.1 fewer cases (per 100,000 population) than the High Change group (SE: 143.6, p < 0.01). A measured, evidence-based approach is required to safely relax the community mitigation strategies and practice phased-reopening of the country.

Differential impact of mitigation policies and socioeconomic status on COVID-19 prevalence and social distancing in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The spread of COVID-19 has highlighted the long-standing health inequalities across the U.S. as neighborhoods with fewer resources were associated with higher rates of COVID-19 transmission. Although the stay-at-home order was one of the most effective methods to contain its spread, residents in lower-income neighborhoods faced barriers to practicing social distancing. We aimed to quantify the differential impact of stay-at-home policy on COVID-19 transmission and residents' mobility across neighborhoods of different levels of socioeconomic disadvantage. METHODS: This was a comparative interrupted time-series analysis at the county level. We included 2087 counties from 38 states which both implemented and lifted the state-wide stay-at-home order. Every county was assigned to one of four equally-sized groups based on its levels of disadvantage, represented by the Area Deprivation Index. Prevalence of COVID-19 was calculated by dividing the daily number of cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases by the number of residents from the 2010 Census. We used the Social Distancing Index (SDI), derived from the COVID-19 Impact Analysis Platform, to measure the mobility. For the evaluation of implementation, the observation started from Mar 1st 2020 to 1 day before lifting; and, for lifting, it ranged from 1 day after implementation to Jul 5th 2020. We calculated a comparative change of daily trends in COVID-19 prevalence and Social Distancing Index between counties with three highest disadvantage levels and those with the least level before and after the implementation and lifting of the stay-at-home order, separately. RESULTS: On both stay-at-home implementation and lifting dates, COVID-19 prevalence was much higher among counties with the highest or lowest disadvantage level, while mobility decreased as the disadvantage level increased. Mobility of the most disadvantaged counties was least impacted by stay-at-home implementation and relaxation compared to counties with the most resources; however, disadvantaged counties experienced the largest relative increase in COVID-19 infection after both stay-at-home implementation and relaxation. CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhoods with varying levels of socioeconomic disadvantage reacted differently to the implementation and relaxation of COVID-19 mitigation policies. Policymakers should consider investing more resources in disadvantaged counties as the pandemic may not stop until most neighborhoods have it under control.

Internet Access, Social Risk Factors, and Web-Based Social Support Seeking Behavior: Assessing Correlates of the "Digital Divide" Across Neighborhoods in The State of Maryland.

We aimed to empirically measure the degree to which there is a "digital divide" in terms of access to the internet at the small-area community level within the State of Maryland and the City of Baltimore and to assess the relationship and association of this divide with community-level SDOH risk factors, community-based social service agency location, and web-mediated support service seeking behavior. To assess the socio-economic characteristics of the neighborhoods across the state, we calculated the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) using the U.S. Census, American Community Survey (5-year estimates) of 2017. To assess the digital divide, at the community level, we used the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) data on the number of residential fixed Internet access service connections. We assessed the availability of and web-based access to community-based social service agencies using data provided by the "Aunt Bertha" information platform. We performed community and regional level descriptive and special analyses for ADI social risk factors, connectivity, and both the availability of and web-based searches for community-based social services. To help assess potential neighborhood linked factors associated with the rates of web-based social services searches by individuals in need, we applied logistic regression using generalized estimating equation modeling. Baltimore City contained more disadvantaged neighborhoods compared to other areas in Maryland. In Baltimore City, 20.3% of neighborhoods (defined by census block groups) were disadvantaged with ADI at the 90th percentile while only 6.6% of block groups across Maryland were in this disadvantaged category. Across the State, more than half of all census tracts had 801-1000 households (per 1000 households) with internet subscription. In contrast, in Baltimore City about half of all census tracts had only 401-600 of the households (per 1000 households) with internet subscriptions. Most block groups in Maryland and Baltimore City lacked access to social services facilities (61% of block groups at the 90th percentile of disadvantage in Maryland and 61.3% of block groups at the 90th percentile of disadvantage in Baltimore City). After adjusting for other variables, a 1% increase in the ADI measure of social disadvantage, resulting in a 1.7% increase in the number of individuals seeking social services. While more work is needed, our findings support the premise that the digital divide is closely associated with other SDOH factors. The policymakers must propose policies to address the digital divide on a national level and also in disadvantaged communities experiencing the digital divide in addition to other SDOH challenges.

Statins for age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a progressive, late-onset disorder of the macula affecting central vision. It is the leading cause of blindness in people over 65 years in industrialized countries. Recent epidemiologic, genetic, and pathological evidence has shown that AMD shares a number of risk factors with atherosclerosis, leading to the hypothesis that statins may exert protective effects in AMD. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to examine the effectiveness of statins compared with other treatments, no treatment, or placebo in delaying the onset and progression of AMD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to March 2016), EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to March 2016), PubMed (January 1946 to March 2016), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com) (last searched 5 June 2014), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 31 March 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials that compared statins with other treatments, no treatment, or placebo in people who were diagnosed as having the early stages of AMD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently evaluated the search results against the selection criteria, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We did not perform meta-analysis due to heterogeneity in the interventions and outcomes between the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Two RCTs with a total of 144 participants met the selection criteria. Both trials compared simvastatin versus placebo in older people (older than 50 or 60 years) with high risk of developing AMD (drusen present on examination). Overall, we judged the quality of the evidence to be low, as we downgraded all outcomes due to limitations in the designs of the trials and insufficient outcome reporting. The larger trial, with 114 participants, was conducted in Australia and used a higher dose (40 mg daily) of simvastatin for three years. Participants and study personnel in this trial were adequately masked, however data were missing for 30% of participants at three years' follow-up. The smaller trial, with 30 participants, was conducted in Italy and used a lower dose (20 mg) of simvastatin for three months. This trial reported insufficient details to assess the risk of bias.Neither trial reported data for change in visual acuity. Low-quality evidence from the smaller trial, with 30 participants, did not show a statistically significant difference between the simvastatin and placebo groups in visual acuity values at three months of treatment (decimal visual acuity 0.21 ± 0.56 in simvastatin group and 0.19 ± 0.40 in placebo group) or 45 days after the completion of treatment (decimal visual acuity 0.20 ± 0.50 in simvastatin group and 0.19 ± 0.48 in placebo group). The lack of a difference in visual acuity was not explained by lens or retina status, which remained unchanged during and after the treatment period for both groups.Preliminary analyses of 42 participants who had completed 12 months' follow-up in the larger trial did not show a statistically significant difference between simvastatin and the placebo groups for visual acuity, drusen score, or visual function (effect estimates and confidence intervals were not available). Complete data for these outcomes at three years' follow-up were not reported. At three years, low-quality evidence showed an effect of simvastatin in slowing progression of AMD compared with placebo to be uncertain (odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 1.09).One trial did not report adverse outcomes. The second trial reported no difference between groups in terms of adverse events such as death, muscle aches, and acute hepatitis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from currently available RCTs is insufficient to conclude that statins have a role in preventing or delaying the onset or progression of AMD.

Statins for age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a progressive late onset disorder of the macula affecting central vision. Age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in people over 65 years in industrialized countries. Recent epidemiologic, genetic, and pathological evidence has shown AMD shares a number of risk factors with atherosclerosis, leading to the hypothesis that statins may exert protective effects in AMD. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to examine the effectiveness of statins compared with other treatments, no treatment, or placebo in delaying the onset and progression of AMD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to June 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2014), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to June 2014), PubMed (January 1946 to June 2014), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 5 June 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared statins with other treatments, no treatment, or placebo in participants who were either susceptible to or diagnosed as having early stages of AMD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Two authors independently evaluated the search results against the selection criteria, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We did not perform meta-analysis due to heterogeneity in the interventions and outcomes among the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Two RCTs with 144 total participants met the selection criteria. Both trials compared simvastatin versus placebo in older people (> 50 or 60 years) with high risk of developing AMD (drusen present on examination). The larger trial with 114 participants was conducted in Australia and used a higher dose (40 mg daily) of simvastatin for three years. Participants and study personnel in this trial were adequately masked; however, data were missing for 30% of participants at three years follow-up. The smaller trial of 30 participants was conducted in Italy and used a lower dose (20 mg) of simvastatin for three months. This trial reported insufficient details to assess the risk of bias.Neither trial reported data for change in visual acuity. Analysis of 30 participants in the smaller trial did not show a statistically significant difference between the simvastatin and placebo groups in visual acuity values at three months of treatment (decimal visual acuity 0.21 ± 0.56 in simvastatin group and 0.19 ± 0.40 in placebo group) or 45 days after the completion of treatment (decimal visual acuity 0.20 ± 0.50 in simvastatin group and 0.19 ± 0.48 in placebo group). The lack of a difference in visual acuity was not explained by lens or retina status, which remained unchanged during and after the treatment period for both groups.Preliminary analyses of 42 participants who had completed 12 months follow-up in the larger trial did not show a statistically significant difference between simvastatin and the placebo groups for visual acuity, drusen score, or visual function (effect estimates and confidence intervals were not available). Complete data for these outcomes at three years follow-up were not reported. At three years, the effect of simvastatin in slowing progression of AMD compared with placebo was uncertain (odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 1.09).One trial did not report adverse outcomes. The second trial reported no difference between groups in terms of adverse events such as death, muscle aches, and acute hepatitis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from currently available RCTs is insufficient to conclude that statins have a role in preventing or delaying the onset or progression of AMD.

Pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle for repairing simple rhegmatogenous retinal detachments.

BACKGROUND: Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a full-thickness break in the sensory retina, caused by vitreous traction on the retina. While pneumatic retinopexy, scleral buckle, and vitrectomy are the accepted surgical interventions for eyes with RRD, their relative effectiveness has remained controversial.  OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this review were to assess the effectiveness and safety of pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle or pneumatic retinopexy versus a combination treatment of scleral buckle and vitrectomy for people with RRD. The secondary objectives were to summarize any data on economic measures and quality of life. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to January 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2015), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to January 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 13 January 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle (with or without vitrectomy) for eyes with RRD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: After screening for eligibility, two review authors independently extracted study characteristics, methods, and outcomes. We followed systematic review standards as set forth by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We included two randomized controlled trials (218 eyes of 216 participants) comparing the effectiveness of pneumatic retinopexy versus scleral buckle for eyes with RRD. We identified no studies investigating the comparison of pneumatic retinopexy versus a combination treatment of scleral buckle and vitrectomy. Of the two included studies, one was a small study with 20 participants enrolled in Ireland and followed for an average of 16 months. The second study was larger with 196 participants (198 eyes) enrolled in the United States and followed for at least 6 months. Cautious interpretation of the results is warranted, since we graded the evidence as low to moderate quality due to insufficient reporting of study methods and imprecision and inconsistency among study results.Both studies showed fewer eyes achieving retinal reattachment in the pneumatic retinopexy group compared with the scleral buckle group by six-months follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.02, 218 eyes); however, we are uncertain as to whether the intervention has an important effect on reattachment because the results are imprecise. Eyes in the pneumatic retinopexy group also were more likely to have had a recurrence of retinal detachment by six-months follow-up (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.00 to 3.24, 218 eyes); however, we are uncertain as to whether the intervention has an important effect on recurrence because the lower CI equals no difference. Neither study reported mean change in visual acuity, quality of life data, or economic measures. Differences between the pneumatic retinopexy group and scleral buckle group were uncertain due to small numbers of events with respect to operative ocular adverse events (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.42, 218 eyes), development of cataract (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.54, 198 eyes), glaucoma (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.91, 198 eyes), macular pucker (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.67, 198 eyes), and proliferative vitreoretinopathy (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.96, 218 eyes). Fewer eyes in the pneumatic retinopexy group compared with the scleral buckle group experienced choroidal detachment (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.57, 198 eyes) or myopic shift equal to or greater than 1 diopter spherical equivalent (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13, 198 eyes). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that pneumatic retinopexy may result in lower rates of reattachment and higher rates of recurrence than scleral buckle for eyes with RRD, but does not rule out no difference between procedures. The relative safety of the procedures is uncertain and the relative effects of these procedures in terms of other patient-important outcomes, such as visual acuity and quality of life, is unknown. Due to the limited information available between pneumatic retinopexy and scleral buckle procedures, future research addressing these evidence gaps are warranted.

Effectiveness of telehealth versus in-person care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

In this systematic review, we compared the effectiveness of telehealth with in-person care during the pandemic using PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from March 2020 to April 2023. We included English-language, U.S.-healthcare relevant studies comparing telehealth with in-person care conducted after the onset of the pandemic. Two reviewers independently screened search results, serially extracted data, and independently assessed the risk of bias and strength of evidence. We identified 77 studies, the majority of which (47, 61%) were judged to have a serious or high risk of bias. Differences, if any, in healthcare utilization and clinical outcomes between in-person and telehealth care were generally small and/or not clinically meaningful and varied across the type of outcome and clinical area. For process outcomes, there was a mostly lower rate of missed visits and changes in therapy/medication and higher rates of therapy/medication adherence among patients receiving an initial telehealth visit compared with those receiving in-person care. However, the rates of up-to-date labs/paraclinical assessment were also lower among patients receiving an initial telehealth visit compared with those receiving in-person care. Most studies lacked a standardized approach to assessing outcomes. While we refrain from making an overall conclusion about the performance of telehealth versus in-person visits the use of telehealth is comparable to in-person care across a variety of outcomes and clinical areas. As we transition through the COVID-19 era, models for integrating telehealth with traditional care become increasingly important, and ongoing evaluations of telehealth will be particularly valuable.

Development of a Social Risk Score in the Electronic Health Record to Identify Social Needs Among Underserved Populations: Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with unmet social needs and social determinants of health (SDOH) challenges continue to face a disproportionate risk of increased prevalence of disease, health care use, higher health care costs, and worse outcomes. Some existing predictive models have used the available data on social needs and SDOH challenges to predict health-related social needs or the need for various social service referrals. Despite these one-off efforts, the work to date suggests that many technical and organizational challenges must be surmounted before SDOH-integrated solutions can be implemented on an ongoing, wide-scale basis within most US-based health care organizations. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to retrieve available information in the electronic health record (EHR) relevant to the identification of persons with social needs and to develop a social risk score for use within clinical practice to better identify patients at risk of having future social needs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using EHR data (2016-2021) and data from the US Census American Community Survey. We developed a prospective model using current year-1 risk factors to predict future year-2 outcomes within four 2-year cohorts. Predictors of interest included demographics, previous health care use, comorbidity, previously identified social needs, and neighborhood characteristics as reflected by the area deprivation index. The outcome variable was a binary indicator reflecting the likelihood of the presence of a patient with social needs. We applied a generalized estimating equation approach, adjusting for patient-level risk factors, the possible effect of geographically clustered data, and the effect of multiple visits for each patient. RESULTS: The study population of 1,852,228 patients included middle-aged (mean age range 53.76-55.95 years), White (range 324,279/510,770, 63.49% to 290,688/488,666, 64.79%), and female (range 314,741/510,770, 61.62% to 278,488/448,666, 62.07%) patients from neighborhoods with high socioeconomic status (mean area deprivation index percentile range 28.76-30.31). Between 8.28% (37,137/448,666) and 11.55% (52,037/450,426) of patients across the study cohorts had at least 1 social need documented in their EHR, with safety issues and economic challenges (ie, financial resource strain, employment, and food insecurity) being the most common documented social needs (87,152/1,852,228, 4.71% and 58,242/1,852,228, 3.14% of overall patients, respectively). The model had an area under the curve of 0.702 (95% CI 0.699-0.705) in predicting prospective social needs in the overall study population. Previous social needs (odds ratio 3.285, 95% CI 3.237-3.335) and emergency department visits (odds ratio 1.659, 95% CI 1.634-1.684) were the strongest predictors of future social needs. CONCLUSIONS: Our model provides an opportunity to make use of available EHR data to help identify patients with high social needs. Our proposed social risk score could help identify the subset of patients who would most benefit from further social needs screening and data collection to avoid potentially more burdensome primary data collection on all patients in a target population of interest.

Association of retinal sensitivity to integrity of photoreceptor inner/outer segment junction in patients with diabetic macular edema.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between retinal sensitivity and the photoreceptor inner segment/outer segment (IS/OS) layer status in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five adult patients (37 eyes) diagnosed with DME and managed at the Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, MD). METHODS: We obtained simultaneous fundus microperimetry (MP) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) of patients with DME using a combined MP/OCT system. The device recorded retinal sensitivity and retinal thickness on a 3-dimensional tomography map, and we performed a point-by-point analysis of the IS/OS layer integrity at every MP point. We also reviewed OCT scans to determine the type of DME, cystoid macular edema, or diffuse macular edema (absence of any cysts). In addition, fixation stability and fixation location were analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Retinal point sensitivity measured by MP. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (37 eyes: 29 male and 8 female; mean age, 64.16 years) with DME were enrolled. Fixation was centric in 30 eyes (81%), paracentric in 3 eyes (8%), and eccentric in 4 eyes (11%). Twenty-seven eyes had cystoid macular edema, and 10 eyes had diffuse macular edema. Mean central subfield thickness was 325 µm. We analyzed a total of 1036 individual MP points. Mean point sensitivity was 10.51 dB. A total of 793 points (76.5%) had IS/OS layer present, and 243 points (23.5%) had IS/OS layer disrupted. A mixed linear model, constructed to adjust for potential confounders and account for dependence between retinal points, revealed that the absence of the IS/OS junction was significantly associated with a 3.28-dB decrease in retinal point sensitivity (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This novel index study demonstrates that disruption of the IS/OS junction is correlated with a significant decrease in point sensitivity in eyes with DME. Further studies are indicated to confirm and validate this relationship. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Application of natural language processing to identify social needs from patient medical notes: development and assessment of a scalable, performant, and rule-based model in an integrated healthcare delivery system.

Objectives: To develop and test a scalable, performant, and rule-based model for identifying 3 major domains of social needs (residential instability, food insecurity, and transportation issues) from the unstructured data in electronic health records (EHRs). Materials and Methods: We included patients aged 18 years or older who received care at the Johns Hopkins Health System (JHHS) between July 2016 and June 2021 and had at least 1 unstructured (free-text) note in their EHR during the study period. We used a combination of manual lexicon curation and semiautomated lexicon creation for feature development. We developed an initial rules-based pipeline (Match Pipeline) using 2 keyword sets for each social needs domain. We performed rule-based keyword matching for distinct lexicons and tested the algorithm using an annotated dataset comprising 192 patients. Starting with a set of expert-identified keywords, we tested the adjustments by evaluating false positives and negatives identified in the labeled dataset. We assessed the performance of the algorithm using measures of precision, recall, and F1 score. Results: The algorithm for identifying residential instability had the best overall performance, with a weighted average for precision, recall, and F1 score of 0.92, 0.84, and 0.92 for identifying patients with homelessness and 0.84, 0.82, and 0.79 for identifying patients with housing insecurity. Metrics for the food insecurity algorithm were high but the transportation issues algorithm was the lowest overall performing metric. Discussion: The NLP algorithm in identifying social needs at JHHS performed relatively well and would provide the opportunity for implementation in a healthcare system. Conclusion: The NLP approach developed in this project could be adapted and potentially operationalized in the routine data processes of a healthcare system.

Statins for age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a progressive late onset disorder of the macula affecting central vision. Age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in people over 65 years in industrialized countries (Congdon 2003). Recent epidemiologic, genetic and pathological evidence has shown AMD shares a number of risk factors with atherosclerosis, leading to the hypothesis that statins may exert protective effects in AMD. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of statins compared with other treatments, no treatment, or placebo in delaying the onset and/or progression of AMD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 9), MEDLINE (January 1950 to September 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to September 2011), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to September 2011), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 16 September 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared statins with other treatments, no treatment, or placebo in participants who were either susceptible to or diagnosed as having early stages of AMD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently evaluated the search results against the selection criteria. Two Italian speaking colleagues extracted data. One author entered data. We did not perform a meta-analysis because only one completed RCT was identified. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies met the selection criteria. One trial reported insufficient details to assess the risk of bias; the other trial is ongoing.Of the completed trial, the analyses of 30 participants did not show a statistically significant difference between the simvastatin and the placebo arm in visual acuity at three months of treatment (decimal visual acuity 0.21± 0.56 in simvastatin and 0.19± 0.40 in placebo arm) or 45 days after the completion of treatment (decimal visual acuity 0.20± 0.50 in simvastatin and 0.19± 0.48 in placebo arm). The lens and retina status were unchanged during and after the treatment period for both groups.Of the ongoing trial, the preliminary analyses of 42 participants who completed 12 months follow-up did not show a statistically significant difference between the simvastatin and the placebo arm in visual acuity, drusen score or visual function (effect estimates and confidence intervals were not available). We contacted the investigators and will update the review as data become available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from currently available RCTs was insufficient to conclude that statins have any role in preventing or delaying the onset or progression of AMD.

Interventions for chronic blepharitis.

BACKGROUND: Blepharitis, an inflammatory condition associated with itchiness, redness, flaking, and crusting of the eyelids, is a common eye condition that affects both children and adults. It is common in all ethnic groups and across all ages. Although infrequent, blepharitis can lead to permanent alterations to the eyelid margin or vision loss from superficial keratopathy (abnormality of the cornea), corneal neovascularization, and ulceration. Most importantly, blepharitis frequently causes significant ocular symptoms such as burning sensation, irritation, tearing, and red eyes as well as visual problems such as photophobia and blurred vision. The exact etiopathogenesis is unknown, but suspected to be multifactorial, including chronic low-grade infections of the ocular surface with bacteria, infestations with certain parasites such as demodex, and inflammatory skin conditions such as atopy and seborrhea. Blepharitis can be categorized in several different ways. First, categorization is based on the length of disease process: acute or chronic blepharitis. Second, categorization is based on the anatomical location of disease: anterior, or front of the eye (e.g. staphylococcal and seborrheic blepharitis), and posterior, or back of the eye (e.g. meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD)). This review focuses on chronic blepharitis and stratifies anterior and posterior blepharitis. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of interventions in the treatment of chronic blepharitis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1950 to February 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to February 2012), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We searched the reference lists of included studies for any additional studies not identified by the electronic searches. There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 9 February 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials (CCTs) in which participants were adults aged 16 years or older and clinically diagnosed with chronic blepharitis. We also included trials where participants with chronic blepharitis were a subset of the participants included in the study and data were reported separately for these participants. Interventions within the scope of this review included medical treatment and lid hygiene measures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed search results, reviewed full-text copies for eligibility, examined risk of bias, and extracted data. Data were meta-analyzed for studies comparing similar interventions and reporting comparable outcomes with the same timing. Otherwise, results for included studies were summarized in the text. MAIN RESULTS: There were 34 studies (2169 participants with blepharitis) included in this review: 20 studies (14 RCTs and 6 CCTs) included 1661 participants with anterior or mixed blepharitis and 14 studies (12 RCTs and 2 CCTs) included 508 participants with posterior blepharitis (MGD). Due to the heterogeneity of study characteristics among the included studies, with respect to follow-up periods and types of interventions, comparisons, and condition of participants, our ability to perform meta-analyses was limited. Topical antibiotics were shown to provide some symptomatic relief and were effective in eradicating bacteria from the eyelid margin for anterior blepharitis. Lid hygiene may provide symptomatic relief for anterior and posterior blepharitis. The effectiveness of other treatments for blepharitis, such as topical steroids and oral antibiotics, were inconclusive. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite identifying 34 trials related to treatments for blepharitis, there is no strong evidence for any of the treatments in terms of curing chronic blepharitis. Commercial products are marketed to consumers and prescribed to patients without substantial evidence of effectiveness. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of such treatments. Any RCT designed for this purpose should separate participants by type of condition (e.g. staphylococcal blepharitis or MGD) in order to minimize imbalances between groups (type I errors) and to achieve statistical power for analyses (prevent type II errors). Medical interventions and commercial products should be compared with conventional lid hygiene measures, such as warm compresses and eyelid margin washing, to determine effectiveness, as well as head-to-head to show comparative effectiveness between treatments. Outcomes of interest should be patient-centered and measured using validated questionnaires or scales. It is important that participants be followed long-term, at least one year, to assess chronic outcomes properly.

Outcomes of In-Person and Telehealth Ambulatory Encounters During COVID-19 Within a Large Commercially Insured Cohort.

Importance: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, few studies have assessed the association of telehealth with outcomes of care, including patterns of health care use after the initial encounter. Objective: To assess the association of telehealth and in-person visits with outcomes of care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study assessed continuously enrolled members in private health plans of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association from July 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were ambulatory encounters per enrollee stratified by characteristics derived from enrollment files, practitioner claims, and community characteristics linked to the enrollee's zip code. Outcomes of care were assessed 14 days after the initial encounters and included follow-up encounters of any kind, emergency department encounters, and hospitalizations after initial telehealth or in-person encounters. Results: In this cohort study of 40 739 915 individuals (mean [SD] age, 35.37 [18.77] years; 20 480 768 [50.3%] female), ambulatory encounters decreased by 1.0% and the number of in-person encounters per enrollee decreased by 17.0% from 2019 to 2020; however, as a proportion of all ambulatory encounters, telehealth encounters increased substantially from 0.6% (n = 236 220) to 14.1% (n = 5 743 718). For members with an initial telehealth encounter for a new acute condition, the adjusted odds ratio was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.42-1.46) for all follow-ups combined and 1.11 (95% CI, 1.06-1.16) for an emergency department encounter. For members with an initial telehealth encounter for a new chronic condition, the adjusted odds ratios were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.95) for all follow-ups combined and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.90-0.99) for in-patient admissions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 40.7 million commercially insured adults, telehealth accounted for a large share of ambulatory encounters at the peak of the pandemic and remained prevalent after infection rates subsided. Telehealth encounters for chronic conditions had similar rates of follow-up to in-person encounters for these conditions, whereas telehealth encounters for acute conditions seemed to be more likely than in-person encounters to require follow-up. These findings suggest a direction for future work and are relevant to policy makers, payers, and practitioners as they manage the use of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic and afterward.

Impact of Social Needs in Electronic Health Records and Claims on Health Care Utilization and Costs Risk-Adjustment Models Within Medicaid Population.

Patients enrolled in Medicaid have significantly higher social needs (SNs) than others. Using claims and electronic health records (EHRs) data, managed care organizations (MCOs) could systemically identify high-risk patients with SNs and develop population health management interventions. Impact of SNs on models predicting health care utilization and costs was assessed. This retrospective study included claims and EHRs data on 39,267 patients younger than age 65 years who were continuously enrolled during 2018-2019 in a Medicaid-managed care plan. SN marker was developed suggesting presence of International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision codes in any of the 5 SN domains. Impact of SN marker was compared across demographic and 2 diagnosis-based (ie, Charlson and Adjusted Clinical Groups risk score) prediction models of emergency department (ED) visit and hospitalizations, and total, medical, and pharmacy costs. After combining data sources, prevalence of documented SN marker increased from 11% and 13% to 18% of the study population across claims, EHRs, and both combined, respectively. SN marker improved predictions of demographic models for all utilization and total costs outcomes (area under the curve [AUC] of ED model increased from 0.57 to 0.61 and R2 of total cost model increased from 10.9 to 12.2). In both diagnosis-based models, adding SN marker marginally improved outcomes prediction (AUC of ED model increased from 0.65 to 0.66). This study demonstrated feasibility of using claims and EHRs data to systematically capture SNs and incorporate in prediction models that could enable MCOs and policy makers to adjust and develop effective population health interventions.

Development and assessment of a natural language processing model to identify residential instability in electronic health records' unstructured data: a comparison of 3 integrated healthcare delivery systems.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm could be adapted to extract, with acceptable validity, markers of residential instability (ie, homelessness and housing insecurity) from electronic health records (EHRs) of 3 healthcare systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included patients 18 years and older who received care at 1 of 3 healthcare systems from 2016 through 2020 and had at least 1 free-text note in the EHR during this period. We conducted the study independently; the NLP algorithm logic and method of validity assessment were identical across sites. The approach to the development of the gold standard for assessment of validity differed across sites. Using the EntityRuler module of spaCy 2.3 Python toolkit, we created a rule-based NLP system made up of expert-developed patterns indicating residential instability at the lead site and enriched the NLP system using insight gained from its application at the other 2 sites. We adapted the algorithm at each site then validated the algorithm using a split-sample approach. We assessed the performance of the algorithm by measures of positive predictive value (precision), sensitivity (recall), and specificity. RESULTS: The NLP algorithm performed with moderate precision (0.45, 0.73, and 1.0) at 3 sites. The sensitivity and specificity of the NLP algorithm varied across 3 sites (sensitivity: 0.68, 0.85, and 0.96; specificity: 0.69, 0.89, and 1.0). DISCUSSION: The performance of this NLP algorithm to identify residential instability in 3 different healthcare systems suggests the algorithm is generally valid and applicable in other healthcare systems with similar EHRs. CONCLUSION: The NLP approach developed in this project is adaptable and can be modified to extract types of social needs other than residential instability from EHRs across different healthcare systems.

A cross-sectional study of the current treatment patterns in noninfectious uveitis among specialists in the United States.

PURPOSE: Corticosteroids (CS) are the only approved drug class for treatment of noninfectious uveitis by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Serious side effects are associated with chronic use of systemic CS; established guidelines recommend the use of steroid-sparing agents if control of uveitis cannot be achieved with ≤ 10 mg/day of prednisone (or equivalent) within 3 months. This study evaluated the treatment patterns among physicians who routinely manage patients with noninfectious uveitis to determine how treatment guidelines are followed. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, multicenter study conducted across the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty ophthalmologists and 3 rheumatologists were recruited using payer reimbursement International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes. METHODS: Patient data were reported using a study-specific questionnaire. Physicians were also asked if they were aware of or used recommended treatment guidelines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Uveitis treatment patterns were compared with guidelines. RESULTS: Physicians managed a mean of 5555 patients; patients with uveitis who required systemic CS treatment comprised approximately 5% of each physician's practice. A total of 580 patients with noninfectious uveitis were randomly selected for analyses. Anterior uveitis requiring systemic therapy was diagnosed in 168 patients (29%), intermediate uveitis was diagnosed in 140 patients (24%), posterior uveitis was diagnosed in 150 patients (26%), and panuveitis was diagnosed in 122 patients (21%); 199 patients (34%) had active disease. The mean time interval from the diagnosis of uveitis to the time of survey was 3.1 to 4.5 years. A systemic disorder was associated with uveitis in 16% to 54% of patients; 57% to 100% of patients received systemic immunosuppressive therapy. In all, 360 of 580 patients (62%) received systemic CS, with a mean initial daily dose of 44 mg, tapered to 34 mg prednisone (or equivalent) as maintenance dose. Among physicians surveyed, 75% did not use or were not aware of treatment guidelines for uveitis. CONCLUSIONS: The study reveals that the majority of physicians surveyed are not familiar with or do not adhere to currently recommended guidelines for management of uveitis. High CS doses are used to maintain control of disease, and there is a low level of awareness of recommended guidelines to treat noninfectious uveitis. The finding underscores the need to place further emphasis on educating the medical community and reinforcing treatment guidelines to improve the care of patients with uveitis.

Impact of Area Deprivation Index on the Performance of Claims-Based Risk-Adjustment Models in Predicting Health Care Costs and Utilization.

Traditionally, risk-adjustment models do not address the characteristics of minority populations, such as race or socioeconomic status. This study aimed to evaluate the added value of place-based social determinants on risk-adjustment models in explaining health care costs and utilization. Statewide commercial claims from the Maryland Medical Care Database were used, including 1,150,984 Maryland residents aged 18 to 63 with ≥6 months enrollment in 2013 and 2014. Area Deprivation Index (ADI) was assigned to individuals through zip code. The authors examined the addition of ADI to predictive models of concurrent and prospective costs and utilization; linear regression was adopted for costs and logistic regression for utilization markers. Performance measures included R2 for costs (total, pharmacy, and medical costs) and the area under the curve (AUC) for utilization (being top 5% top users, having any hospitalization, having any emergency room [ER] visit, having any avoidable ER visit, and having any readmission). All performance measures were derived from the bootstrapping analysis with 200 iterations. Study subjects were ∼48% male with a mean age of ∼41 years. Adding ADI to the demographics or claims-based models generally did not improve performance except in predicting the probability of having any ER or any avoidable ER visit; for example, AUC of avoidable ER visits increased significantly from .610 to .613 when using ADI rank deciles in claims-based models. Future research should focus on patients with a higher need for social services, assess more granular place-based determinants (eg, Census block group), and evaluate the added value of individual social variables.