Kamath, Celia

Background: Increased arterial stiffness, a marker of cardiovascular disease (CVD), is prevalent among African American (AA) adults and contributes to persistent CVD disparities. The Cardio-Ankle Vascular Index (CAVI) is a validated measure of arterial stiffness and predictor of adverse CVD outcomes. However, its relationship with the novel American Heart Association’s Life’s Essential 8 (LE8) cardiovascular health (CVH) construct has not been examined among AAs. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that increased arterial stiffness would be associated with lower CVH among AA adults. Methods: We analyzed baseline data from AA adults in the Techquity by FAITH! Trial, a 2-arm cluster randomized controlled trial conducted across 18 AA churches in Rochester and Minneapolis–St. Paul, Minnesota. Eligible participants (age ≥18 years with suboptimal diet or physical activity [PA]) completed validated electronic surveys (e.g., PA patterns) and clinical assessments (e.g., blood pressure [BP], lipids). CAVI was summarized as mean and categorized as normal (<8), borderline (8 to <9), or abnormal (≥9). CVH was assessed using the LE8 score (range 0-100 points) and categorized as low (<50), moderate (50-79), or high (≥80). Associations between CAVI and LE8 were assessed using multivariable linear regression adjusted for age, sex, and income (continuous) and Fisher’s exact test (categorical). LE8 components were compared across CAVI categories using Kruskal–Wallis tests. Results: Among 140 participants (mean age 53.0 years [SD 14.6]; 68% female), the mean LE8 score was 62.7 (SD 14.0). Nicotine exposure LE8 score was the highest (84.6 [SD 26.6]) and diet was the lowest (40.7 [SD 13.7]). Mean CAVI was 7.9 (SD 1.5), with 50% of participants classified as normal, 22% borderline, and 28% abnormal. No association between continuous CAVI and LE8 scores was observed after adjustment (unadjusted R 2 = 3.5%). All participants with high LE8 had normal CAVI, while abnormal CAVI was more prevalent among those with low (40%) and moderate (30%) LE8 scores (p<0.001). LE8 scores differed across CAVI categories for BP (median 50 in normal CAVI vs 30 in borderline/abnormal CAVI; p=0.003) and glucose LE8 scores (median 100 vs 60; p=0.014). Conclusions: Greater arterial stiffness was associated with lower CVH categories, with notable component-level differences in BP and glucose. Although not independently associated with overall LE8, integrating CAVI and LE8 categories may improve CVD risk stratification among AAs.

PURPOSE Limited access to high-speed internet (broadband [BB]) may pose challenges to video telehealth visit (VTV) utilization. This study explored barriers, facilitators, and attitudes toward VTV adoption in patients with cancer residing in low-BB settings. METHODS We examined a cohort of patients with cancer receiving longitudinal care at Mayo Clinic Cancer Practice in the Upper Midwest. Eligible patients had ≥6 in-person visits during July 2020-October 2022, received oncology care at Mayo Clinic sites, were alive at sampling, and resided in low-BB areas defined by Federal Communications Commission data as 0 or 1 internet service provider offering <25 Mbps. We enrolled 24 participants stratified into two groups: (1) Transitioned users (TUs): adopted VTVs postpandemic (November 2022-December 2023); (2) persistent nonusers (PNUs): received exclusively in-person visits. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in June 2024 and thematically analyzed. RESULTS The average age of participants was 71.3 years (range, 42-88), 50% was female, and all identified as White. Three themes emerged: (1) Structural and clinical constraints—physical examinations, laboratory testing, and chemotherapy administration were viewed as requiring in-person care, whereas VTVs were perceived acceptable for routine follow-ups; (2) Skills and experience—digital literacy was generally adequate, but confidence and direct exposure to VTV distinguished TU from PNU; (3) Motivations—both groups preferred in-person care for cancer-related emotional reassurance. TU cited weather, travel burden, and proactive provider offering as adoption triggers, whereas PNU reported that VTV was rarely offered. TU focused on system-level solutions, whereas PNUs preferred individual-level resources. CONCLUSION Differential VTV adoption in low-BB settings reflected exposure, provider offering, and situational necessity rather than BB access alone. Oncology practices should consider normalizing the hybrid care model combining in-person and video appointment visits and provide tailored supports to advance equitable telemedicine. Expanding video care in oncology requires more than digital access and depends on patient experience, care context, and human connection inherent in oncology care.

566 Background: Video telemedicine visits (VTVs) have the potential to overcome disparities in access to cancer care for many socially, geographically, and economically disadvantaged populations. Internet connectivity, digital literacy, and socioeconomic factors are traditionally cited as influencing VTV utilization. However, digital diffusion has occurred rapidly across several sectors, including healthcare, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and less is known about how these factors have evolved to influence VTV utilization behavior over this time. Through a qualitative approach, we aimed to: (1) explore the lived experiences of cancer patients who transitioned to VTV use as compared to those who persistently did not, and (2) identify similarities and differences between these two groups that could inform targeted interventions to support access and patient acceptance of VTVs in the setting of cancer care. Methods: During June 2024, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 patients (Mean age 71.3 years, range 42-88; female 50%) receiving ongoing, longitudinal cancer care at our academic medical center since July 2021 who had not used VTVs through at least October 2022. Using purposeful sampling, patients were equally divided according to VTV utilization behaviors defined as “transitioned users” (TU; i.e. those who transitioned to VTV utilization after October 2022) and “persistent non-users” (PNU). Transcripts were analyzed using a combined deductive–inductive thematic approach and categorized into themes of barriers and facilitators across three domains consistent with the COM-B model: capabilities (C), opportunities (O), and motivations (M). Results: TU patients frequently cited a reduction in travel and logistical considerations as a primary reason for uptake of VTVs. PNU patients frequently reported digital literacy barriers, particularly among older patients, as primary reasons for lack of VTV utilization. TU patients reported more experience and comfort in technical skills as compared to PNU participants. PNU patients also reported less frequent offering of VTV as an option by their care teams over time, implying they may have transitioned to VTV utilization if it had been offered with more regularity. Both study groups desired improved internet access and technical support to enhance (or, in the case of PNU patients, enable) VTV utilization. Conclusions: These findings suggest that multi-modal care delivery may best serve current patient populations, not requiring, yet offering VTV services as an adjunct to in-person care. Longer term, individual barriers to VTV use will also need to be addressed to further optimize access for patients who desire to incorporate this care modality.

Background There is a global mismatch between the number of adults with congenital heart disease and adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) cardiologists, potentially impacting patient outcomes. This survey explores factors influencing trainees and cardiologists' career choices in ACHD. Methods An online, anonymous global survey on demographics, ACHD as a career choice, encouraging and deterring factors assessed via a 5‐point Likert scale and open‐ended questions on recommending ACHD was distributed through targeted emails and social media. Responses meeting a 75% completion criterion were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results Among 811 included responses, most were from women (53.5%), aged 31 to 40 years (48.3%), White individuals (43.3%), non‐Hispanic individuals (85%), from outside the ACHD field (79.0%), and from North America (42.7%). Only 30.9% of non‐ACHD physicians considered specializing in ACHD despite 78.9% recommending it. Encouraging factors included awareness of ACHD significance, mentor influence, and clinical exposure. Key deterrents were inadequate financial incentives, limited job opportunities, and lengthy training. Regional variations showed that longer training duration and lack of compensation incentives were the main deterrents in North America. Suggested solutions included structured training programs, salary improvements, and early ACHD exposure during medical education. Conclusions Less than a third of respondents considered ACHD as a career largely due to inadequate financial incentives, limited job opportunities, and long training duration. Addressing these barriers could enhance recruitment and help meet the growing demands of the ACHD population.

AbstractBackgroundTechnology has revolutionized not only direct patient care but also diagnostic care processes. This study evaluates the transition from glass‐slide microscopy to digital pathology (DP) at a multisite academic institution, using mixed methods to understand user perceptions of digitization and key productivity metrics of practice change.MethodsParticipants included dermatopathologists, pathology reporting specialists, and clinicians. Electronic surveys and individual or group interviews included questions related to technology comfort, trust in DP, and rationale for DP adoption. Case volumes and turnaround times were abstracted from the electronic health record from Qtr 4 2020 to Qtr 1 2023 (inclusive). Data were analyzed descriptively, while interviews were analyzed using methods of content analysis.ResultsThirty‐four staff completed surveys and 22 participated in an interview. Case volumes and diagnostic turnaround time did not differ across the institution during or after implementation timelines (p = 0.084; p = 0.133, respectively). 82.5% (28/34) of staff agreed that DP improved the sign‐out experience, with accessibility, ergonomics, and annotation features described as key factors. Clinicians reported positive perspectives of DP impact on patient safety and interdisciplinary collaboration.ConclusionsOur study demonstrates that DP has a high acceptance rate, does not adversely impact productivity, and may improve patient safety and care collaboration.

Introduction: Shared decision-making (SDM) about anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is widely recommended but its effectiveness is unclear. We assessed the extent to which using an SDM tool promotes high-quality SDM. Hypothesis: SDM will improve communication quality, knowledge, and decisional conflict and will translate to improved medication adherence and outcomes. Methods: In this multicentre encounter-randomized trial, we included patients with nonvalvular AF considering starting/reviewing anticoagulation, and their clinicians. We compared usual care with or without ANTICOAGULATION CHOICE, an SDM conversation tool for use during the clinical encounter that presents individualized risk estimates and compares anticoagulation options across patient important issues. Results: We enrolled and video-recorded 922 patient-clinician encounters. So far, our data have shown that participants in both arms reported near-optimal communication quality, knowledge, and decisional conflict (JAMA IM-2020). Patients in intervention-arm estimated their stroke risks more accurately and were more involved in decision-making (JAMA IM-2020), clinicians were more satisfied (JAMA IM-2020), and cost conversation were more common (JAMA NO-2021). Use of the intervention had no effect on treatment decisions, encounter duration (JAMA IM-2020), treatment adherence, clinical outcomes (JAHA-epub) or patient-perceived sense of the care plan (PEC-epub). New analyses have shown that compared to eligible white participants, black participants more frequently did not enrol to the study. Enrolment of Black, indigenous, and people of colour benefited most form including and prioritizing practices most likely to care for them. We found no evidence of contamination (tool use, functional, or learned) between study arms. Conclusions: Use of an SDM tool improved some measures of SDM quality, without affecting treatment decisions and their sensibility, encounter duration, patient adherence, or clinical outcomes. Our results should calibrate expectations as to what could be accomplished by implementing SDM tools about anticoagulation in the care of patients with AF