Ifelayo, Oluwatomilona

Background: Adolescent patients with moderate to severe idiopathic scoliosis who have completed their skeletal growth face a significant choice in their treatment path: watchful waiting or spinal fusion. Shared decision making (SDM) assists patients and clinicians to find treatments that make intellectual, practical and emotional sense. Our objective was to develop a tool that supports SDM for patients with scoliosis and their families. Methods: We used a user-centered design approach that included collaboration between patients, surgeons and SDM experts, observation of clinician encounters, and literature review. We focused on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients 13 or more years of age with less than 1 year of growth remaining (Risser stage 3 or greater) and curves between 40 and 65 degrees. Results: We included 22 patients, and collected 22 video recordings. From these videos, we identified salient patient priorities for decision making including treatment benefits, surgical complications, pain, scheduling and recovery, and cost. For each theme, we conducted a focused review to obtain the best estimate of effect. Then, an expert SDM designer developed an electronic prototype called Scoliosis Choice. Conclusions: The initial prototype of the scoliosis SDM was finalized and is currently being field tested in clinic. Scoliosis Choice may help patients and surgeons better understand the potential risks and benefits of spinal fusion vs. observation for scoliosis treatment and improve validated measures of quality in patient-parent-surgeon communication.

AbstractBackgroundGiven that abdominal aorta is a retroperitoneal structure, increased body mass index (BMI) may have an adverse effect upon the quality of aortic ultrasonographic imaging.PurposeTo assess the hypothesis that increased BMI is associated with worsening point‐of‐care abdominal aortic ultrasonographic image quality.MethodsThis is a retrospective single‐center study of point‐of‐care abdominal aortic ultrasound examinations performed in an academic emergency department (ED) with fellowship‐trained emergency ultrasonography faculty performing quality assurance review.ResultsMean ± SD BMI was 27.4 ± 6.2, among the 221 included records. The overall quality rating decreased as BMI increased (correlation coefficient − 0.24; P < .001) and this persisted after adjustment for age and sex (P < .001). Although BMI was higher on average in the records that were of insufficient quality for clinical decisions when compared with those of sufficient quality (mean BMI 28.7 vs 27.0), this did not reach statistical significance in a univariable setting (P = .11) or after adjusting for age and sex (P = .14).ConclusionThis study data shows a decrease in point‐of‐care abdominal aorta ultrasound imaging quality as BMI increases, though this difference did not result in a statistically significant impairment in achieving the minimum quality for clinical decisions. This finding may help ameliorate some clinician concerns about ultrasonography for patients with high BMI.

AbstractBackgroundMany clinicians believe that a patient's body mass index (BMI) affects the likelihood of obtaining high quality ultrasound images.ObjectivesTo assess the hypothesis that increased BMI is associated with worsening focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) image quality.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective single‐center study of FAST examinations performed in a large academic emergency department (ED) with fellowship‐trained emergency ultrasonography faculty performing quality assurance review.ResultsMean (SD) BMI was 28.0 (6.6) among the 302 included studies. The overall quality rating tended to decrease as BMI increased but did not achieve statistical significance in a univariable setting (P = .06) or after adjustment for age and sex (P = .06). Operators perception of image adequacy was largely unaffected by BMI, with the exception of the pericardial view.ConclusionThis study did not identify a statistically significant difference in FAST quality with increased BMI. This result may help assuage clinician concerns about ultrasonography for patients in the ED.

Despite its rank as the fourth healthiest state in the United States, Minnesota has clear cardiovascular disease disparities between African-Americans and whites. Culturally-tailored interventions implemented using community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles have been vital to improving health and wellness among African-Americans. This paper delineates the establishment, impact, and lessons learned from the formation of a community steering committee (CSC) to guide the Fostering African-American Improvement in Total Health (FAITH!) Program, a CBPR cardiovascular health promotion initiative among African-Americans in Minnesota. The theory-informed CSC implementation process included three phases: (1) Membership Formation and Recruitment, (2) Engagement, and (3) Covenant Development and Empowerment. The CSC is comprised of ten diverse community members guided by mutually agreed upon bylaws in their commitment to FAITH!. Overall, members considered the CSC implementation process effective and productive. A CBPR conceptual model provided an outline of proximal and distal goals for the CSC and FAITH!. The CSC implementation process yielded four lessons learned: (1) Have clarity of purpose and vision, (2) cultivate group cohesion, (3) employ consistent review of CBPR tenets, and (4) expect the unexpected. A robust CSC was established and was instrumental to the success and impact of FAITH! within African-American communities in Minnesota.