Maxson, Julie A

Objectives: We evaluated agreement between human papillomavirus (HPV) tests performed on self-collected vaginal and clinician-collected cervical specimens to advance HPV self-collection as a cervical cancer screening option in our health care system. Methods: This diagnostic accuracy study was conducted at an academic medical center. Participants were 25–65 years old with upcoming colposcopy appointments. One cohort (n = 79) self-collected a vaginal specimen in the clinic immediately before a clinician-collected cervical specimen. The second cohort (n = 115) self-collected a vaginal specimen at home, mailed it in, and had a clinician-collected cervical specimen in the clinic. Paired specimens were evaluated for total (TPA), positive (PPA), and negative (NPA) percentage agreement. Extreme temperature stability studies were also conducted. Results: Compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens, in-clinic self-collected vaginal specimens showed a TPA, PPA, and NPA of 98%, 100%, and 97% for HPV16; 99%, 100%, and 99% for HPV18; 86%, 94%, and 79% for high-risk other (HRO) HPV. The TPA, PPA, and NPA for at-home self-collected vaginal specimens compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens were 94%, 79%, and 96% for HPV16; 95%, 43%, and 98% for HPV18; 89%, 80%, and 93% for HRO. Vaginal specimens showed prolonged stability and were unaffected by extreme temperatures. Conclusions: In general, in-clinic and at-home self-collected vaginal HPV specimens for HPV screening demonstrate high agreement with clinician-collected cervical specimens, with the exception of low PPA in the at-home self-collected vaginal HPV18 subgroup. Our findings support the use of HPV self-collection as a practical option to expand access to cervical cancer screening.

Objectives: To assess how social risk factors and socioeconomic status (SES) affect health care costs at a large, integrated health system of 45 clinics in Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed administrative patient cost data from January 1 through December 31, 2022. Social risk factors (lack of financial resources, food insecurity, intimate partner violence, unmet transportation needs, and housing instability) were determined with patient questionnaires. Cost z -scores were compared across all risk-factor quartiles. We used a housing-based measure to objectively determine SES. Results: We analyzed data from 410 624 patients empaneled with 689 family medicine clinicians. Self-reported risk factor data were incomplete for 219 321 patients. Costs were higher for those with higher social risk (mean cost z -score: high risk = 0.38, low risk = 0.11; P < .001). In addition, higher costs were associated with increasing age, greater medical complexity (higher Adjusted Clinical Group scores), White race, and lack of financial resources. Although we observed geographic variations in cost, urban and rural locations did not have significant cost differences. Costs were similar across all quartiles of SES, and the absolute difference in cost z -scores between the highest and lowest SES quartiles was only 0.04. The multivariate analysis, which adjusted for age, medical complexity, race, sex, and objective SES, showed that these specific associations were substantially decreased and no longer significantly associated with mean cost z -scores. Conclusions: Patient-reported social risk factors were significantly associated with increased cost of care in a large, multispecialty health system in the midwestern US. These associations were decreased in the multivariate analysis. Results should be interpreted cautiously for readers outside the midwestern US, given potential responder bias and the racial homogeneity (92% White) of the study cohort.

Background: Cervical cancer screening with a self-collected vaginal specimen for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in May 2024, offering a potential solution to declining screening rates. Objective: We aimed to assess acceptability of clinic-based vaginal specimen self-collection for HPV testing and to evaluate associations between participants’ sociodemographics and their likelihood of choosing self-collection for future screening and the overall acceptability of using the Evalyn® brush device. We also evaluated associations between specific acceptability constructs and reported likelihood to use the device in the future and overall acceptability. Methods: Following self-collection of a vaginal specimen, participants completed an electronic survey that measured constructs from the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Associations were assessed using logistic regressions. The study was conducted at a colposcopy clinic in the Gynecology department of a midwestern academic medical center in the United States from November 2022 through July 2023. Results: Participants ( n = 81) reported high likelihood (98% likely or very likely) of choosing in-home self-collection for future screening and unanimity on overall acceptability (100% acceptable or completely acceptable) of using the device. More affirmative responses to measures on instruction understandability, ease of device use, understanding the device is used for cervical cancer screening, and perceiving self-collection improves screening rates were associated with a higher likelihood to choose self-collection for future screenings and overall acceptability of the device (all p values <0.05). Conclusion: Vaginal specimen self-collection for HPV testing was well-received in the studied population, with high acceptability and likelihood of uptake. Implementation efforts should provide user-friendly instructions and emphasize the benefits of self-collection for cervical cancer screening, particularly among people less likely to engage with clinician-collected speculum-based screening.

Introduction/Objectives: Despite U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and American Cancer Society endorsement of primary HPV screening, limited published data shows low uptake. Primary Aim: Assess cervical cancer screening rates over time, particularly primary HPV test uptake, among patients in a midwestern practice. Secondary Aim: Evaluate associations between sociodemographics and screening adherence. Methods: Cross-sectional study. Qualifying subjects and type of screening test used were identified by applying ICD-9, ICD-10, lab test, and CPT codes to the Unified Data Platform. Sociodemographics were found through the electronic health record. Results: Primary HPV uptake represented <1% of annual screening from 1/2017 to 1/2022. On 1/1/2022, only 55% of 21 to 29 year old and 63% of 30 to 65 year old were up to date with screening among the studied population. For 21 to 29 year old, compared with White women, Black women were 28% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.72 (0.66-0.79)]. Compared with never-smokers, current smokers were 9% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.91 (0.87-0.96)], past smokers were 14% more likely [RR = 1.14 (1.09-1.2)]. Among 30 to 65 year old, compared with White women, Black women were 14% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.86 (0.81-0.9)]. Compared with never-smokers, current smokers were 21% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.79 (0.77-0.81)], past smokers were 6% less likely [RR = 0.94 (0.92-0.95)]. Jointly considering race, ethnicity, smoking status, Charlson score, and rurality, findings were similar for 21 to 29 year old; Black women were screened less than White women [RR = 0.73 (0.67-0.79)]; current smokers [RR = 0.9 (0.85-0.94)] and past smokers [RR = 1.12 (1.06-1.17)] were screened less than never smokers. For 30 to 65 year old, Black women were screened less than White women [RR = 0.83 (0.79-0.88)]; current smokers [RR = 0.8 (0.78-0.81)] and past smokers [RR = 0.95 (0.93-0.96)] were screened less than never smokers. Conclusions: Screening rates remained below the Healthy People 2030 goal of 79.2% over time, particularly for younger Black women and current smokers, with minimal use of primary HPV screening.

The objective was to determine if a greater proportion of physician full-time equivalent (FTE%) relative to nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NPs/PAs) on care teams was associated with improved individual clinician diabetes quality outcomes. The authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of 420 family medicine clinicians in 110 care teams in a Midwest health system, using administrative data from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. Poisson regression was used to examine the relationship between physician FTE% and the number of patients meeting 5 criteria included in a composite metric for diabetes management (D5). Covariates included panel size, clinician type, sex, years in practice, region, patient satisfaction, care team size, rural location, and panel complexity. Of the 420 clinicians, 167 (40%) were NP/PA staff and 253 (60%) were physicians. D5 criteria were achieved in 37.9% of NP/PA panels compared with 44.5% of physician panels ( P < .001). In adjusted analysis, rate of patients achieving D5 was unrelated to physician FTE% on the care team ( P = .78). Physicians had a 1.082 (95% confidence interval 1.007–1.164) times greater rate of patients with diabetes achieving D5 than NPs/PAs. Clinicians at rural locations had a .904 (.852-.959) times lower rate of achieving D5 than those at urban locations. Physicians had a greater rate of patients achieving D5 compared with NPs/PAs, but physician FTE% on the care team was unrelated to D5 outcomes. This suggests that clinician team composition matters less than team roles and the dynamics of collaborative care between members.

Although U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved and CLIA-waived point-of-care (POC) molecular systems are being implemented in routine clinical practice, instrument reliability, test performance in the hands of end users, and the potential for environmental contamination resulting from use of POC molecular systems have not been extensively evaluated.

Background: The American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Academy of Medicine recommend vitamin D supplementation for breastfeeding infants. However, compliance with this recommendation is poor. Maternal supplementation with vitamin D is a safe and effective alternative to achieving vitamin D sufficiency in breastfeeding infants, and mothers have indicated a preference for self-supplementation over infant supplementation. Research aim: We sought to explore Family Medicine clinicians’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding vitamin D supplementation recommendations for breastfeeding dyads. Methods: Fifty-six Family Medicine clinicians (including faculty physicians, resident physicians, and nurse practitioners/physician assistants) completed an online, anonymous survey regarding their knowledge and practices concerning vitamin D supplementation for breastfeeding infants. Results: The vast majority of clinicians (92.9%) correctly identified the American Academy of Pediatrics’ 2008 recommended dose for vitamin D supplementation in breastfeeding infants and estimated recommending vitamin D supplementation of exclusively breastfeeding infants 70.1% of the time. If all options were equivalent, clinicians would prefer to offer maternal or infant supplementation (50%) or maternal supplementation (37.5%) over infant supplementation (12.5%). Most (69.6%) preferred daily over monthly supplementation regimens. Conclusion: Family Medicine clinicians are knowledgeable regarding current recommendations for vitamin D supplementation in breastfeeding infants. They are also open to recommending maternal supplementation or offering parents a choice of maternal or infant vitamin supplementation.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has symptoms that exist along a spectrum that includes depression and the 2 disorders may coexist. Collaborative care management (CCM) has been successfully used in outpatient mental health management (especially depression and anxiety) with favorable outcomes. Despite this, there exist limited data on clinical impact of a diagnosis of PTSD on depression outcomes in CCM. The present study used a retrospective cohort design to examine the association of PTSD with depression outcomes among 2121 adult patients involved in CCM in a primary care setting. Using standardized self-report measures, baseline depression scores and 6-month outcome scores were evaluated. Seventy-six patients had a diagnosis of PTSD documented in their electronic medical record. Patients with PTSD reported more severe depressive symptoms at baseline (Patient Health Questionnaire–9 score of 17.9 vs 15.4, P < .001) than those without PTSD. Controlling for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, a clinical diagnosis of PTSD was associated with lower odds (AOR = 0.457, CI = 0.274-0.760, P = .003) of remission at 6 months and was also associated with higher odds (AOR = 3.112, CI = 1.921-5.041, P < .001) of persistent depressive symptoms at 6 months after CCM. When coexisting with depression, a diagnosis of PTSD was associated with worse depression outcomes, when managed with CCM in primary care. Opportunities still exist for more aggressive management of depression in these patients to help improve remission as well as reduce persistent depressive symptoms.