Thorsteinsdottir, Bjorg

Abstract Background Delirium is underdiagnosed in clinical practice and is not routinely coded for billing. Manual chart review can be used to identify the occurrence of delirium; however, it is labor-intensive and impractical for large-scale studies. Natural language processing (NLP) has the capability to process raw text in electronic health records (EHRs) and determine the meaning of the information. We developed and validated NLP algorithms to automatically identify the occurrence of delirium from EHRs. Methods This study used a randomly selected cohort from the population-based Mayo Clinic Biobank (N = 300, age ≥65). We adopted the standardized evidence-based framework confusion assessment method (CAM) to develop and evaluate NLP algorithms to identify the occurrence of delirium using clinical notes in EHRs. Two NLP algorithms were developed based on CAM criteria: one based on the original CAM (NLP-CAM; delirium vs no delirium) and another based on our modified CAM (NLP-mCAM; definite, possible, and no delirium). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used for concordance in delirium status between NLP algorithms and manual chart review as the gold standard. The prevalence of delirium cases was examined using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9), NLP-CAM, and NLP-mCAM. Results NLP-CAM demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.919, 1.000, and 0.967, respectively. NLP-mCAM demonstrated sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.827, 0.913, and 0.827, respectively. The prevalence analysis of delirium showed that the NLP-CAM algorithm identified 12 651 (9.4%) delirium patients, the NLP-mCAM algorithm identified 20 611 (15.3%) definite delirium cases, and 10 762 (8.0%) possible cases. Conclusions NLP algorithms based on the standardized evidence-based CAM framework demonstrated high performance in delineating delirium status in an expeditious and cost-effective manner.

Background Patients on home dialysis therapies experience technique failure, which is associated with morbidity and mortality. Reasons for technique failure are complex, and often related to functional decline in the patient or caregiver. Frailty is associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes. We investigated the impact of frailty on technique failure and mortality in a prospective cohort of patients on home dialysis therapies. Methods We collected objective (Fried criteria and Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB]), and subjective (physician and nurse impression) measures of frailty from 109 prevalent home dialysis patients. Our primary outcome was a composite of technique failure, defined as a permanent unplanned transition (> 30 days in duration) to facility-based hemodialysis or all-cause death. The association between different frailty assessment tools and the primary composite outcome was evaluated using Cox models. Results Fried criteria and physician impression was associated with a greater than 2-fold increase in risk of our composite outcome (HR: 2.10 [95% CI 1.09 – 3.99], 2.15 [95% CI 1.15 – 4.00, respectively] in adjusted analyses. Weakness and weight loss subdomains of the Fried criteria were both associated with an increased risk of our composite outcome in adjusted analyses (HR: 2.16 [95% CI 1.23 – 3.78], 2.69 [95% CI 1.39 – 5.40], respectively). Conclusions Objective and subjective measures of frailty are associated with a more than 2-fold higher risk of technique failure or death in patients undergoing home dialysis. Assessing frailty as part of the clinical evaluation for home dialysis therapies may be useful for prognostication and clinical management.

Introduction There is a considerable implementation gap in managing early stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care despite the high prevalence and risk for increased morbidity and mortality associated with CKD. This systematic review aims to synthesise the evidence of efficacy of implementation interventions aimed at primary care practitioners (PCPs) to improve CKD identification and management. We further aim to describe the interventions’ behavioural change components. Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic review of studies from 2000 to October 2017 that evaluate implementation interventions targeting PCPs and which include at least one clinically meaningful CKD outcome. We will search several electronic data bases and conduct reference mining of related systematic reviews and publications. An interdisciplinary team will independently and in duplicate, screen publications, extract data and assess the risk of bias. Clinical outcomes will include all clinically meaningful medical management outcomes relevant to CKD management in primary care such as blood pressure, chronic heart disease and diabetes target achievements. Quantitative evidence synthesis will be performed, where possible. Planned subgroup analyses include by (1) study design, (2) length of follow-up, (3) type of intervention, (4) type of implementation strategy, (5) whether a behavioural or implementation theory was used to guide study, (6) baseline CKD severity, (7) patient minority status, (8) study location and (9) academic setting or not. Ethics and dissemination Approval by research ethics board is not required since the review will only include published and publicly accessible data. Review findings will inform a future trial of an intervention to promote uptake of CKD diagnosis and treatment guidelines in our primary care setting and the development of complementary tools to support its successful adoption and implementation. We will publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and develop accessible summaries of the results. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018102441.

Objectives: Research indicates that the increasing population of over 25 million people in the United States who have limited English proficiency experience differences in decision-making and subsequent care at end of life in the ICU when compared with the general population. The objective of this study was to assess the perceptions of healthcare team members about the factors that influence discussions and decision-making about end of life for patients and family members with limited English proficiency in the ICU. Design: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews with ICU physicians, nurses, and interpreters. Setting: Three ICUs at Mayo Clinic Rochester. Subjects: Sixteen ICU physicians, 12 ICU nurses, and 12 interpreters. Intervention: None. Measurements and Main Results: We conducted 40 semistructured interviews. We identified six key differences in end-of-life decision-making for patients with limited English proficiency compared with patients without limited English proficiency: 1) clinician communication is modified and less frequent; 2) clinician ability to assess patient and family understanding is impaired; 3) relationship building is impaired; 4) patient and family understanding of decision-making concepts (e.g., palliative care) is impaired; 5) treatment limitations are often perceived to be unacceptable due to faith-based and cultural beliefs; and 6) patient and family decision-making styles are different. Facilitators of high-quality decision-making in patients with limited English proficiency included: 1) premeeting between clinician and interpreter; 2) interpretation that communicates empathy and caring; 3) bidirectional communication of cultural perspectives; 4) interpretation that improves messaging including appropriate word choice; and 5) clinician cultural humility. Conclusions: End-of-life decision-making is significantly different for ICU patients with limited English proficiency. Participants identified several barriers and facilitators to high-quality end-of-life decision-making for ICU patients and families with limited English proficiency. Awareness of these factors can facilitate interventions to improve high-quality, compassionate, and culturally sensitive decision-making for patients and families with limited English proficiency.

Background and objectives Dialysis is a preference-sensitive decision where prognosis may play an important role. Although patients desire risk prediction, nephrologists are wary of sharing this information. We reviewed the performance of prognostic indices for patients starting dialysis to facilitate bedside translation. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus for eligible studies of patients starting dialysis published from inception to December 31, 2018. Selection Criteria: Articles describing validated prognostic indices predicting mortality at the start of dialysis. We excluded studies limited to prevalent dialysis patients, AKI and studies excluding mortality in the first 1–3 months. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts, performed full text assessment of inclusion criteria and extracted: study design, setting, population demographics, index performance and risk of bias. Pre-planned random effects meta-analysis was performed stratified by index and predictive window to reduce heterogeneity. Results Of 12,132 articles screened and 214 reviewed in full text, 36 studies were included describing 32 prognostic indices. Predictive windows ranged from 3 months to 10 years, cohort sizes from 46 to 52,796. Meta-analysis showed discrimination area under the curve (AUC) of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 073) with high heterogeneity ( I 2 =99.12). Meta-analysis by index showed highest AUC for The Obi, Ivory, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI)=0.74, also CCI was the most commonly used (ten studies). Other commonly used indices were Kahn-Wright index (eight studies, AUC 0.68), Hemmelgarn modification of the CCI (six studies, AUC 0.66) and REIN index (five studies, AUC 0.69). Of the indices, ten have been validated externally, 16 internally and nine were pre-existing validated indices. Limitations include heterogeneity and exclusion of large cohort studies in prevalent patients. Conclusions Several well validated indices with good discrimination are available for predicting survival at dialysis start.

BACKGROUNDAlthough posthospitalization care transitions programs (CTP) are highly diverse, their overall program thoroughness is most predictive of their success.OBJECTIVETo identify components of a successful homebased CTP and patient characteristics that are most predictive of reduced 30‐day readmissions.DESIGNRetrospective cohort.PATIENTSA total of 315 community‐dwelling, hospitalized, older adults (≥60 years) at high risk for readmission (Elder Risk Assessment score ≥16), discharged home over the period of January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013.SETTINGMidwest primary care practice in an integrated health system.INTERVENTIONEnrollment in a CTP during acute hospitalization.MEASUREMENTSThe primary outcome was all‐cause readmission within 30 days of the first CTP evaluation. Logistic regression was used to examine independent variables, including patient demographics, comorbidities, number of medications, completion, and timing of program fidelity measures, and prior utilization of healthcare.RESULTSThe overall 30‐day readmission rate was 17.1%. The intensity of follow‐up varied among patients, with 17.1% and 50.8% of the patients requiring one and ≥3 home visits, respectively, within 30 days. More than half (54.6%) required visits beyond 30 days. Compared with patients who were not readmitted, readmitted patients were less likely to exhibit cognitive impairment (29.6% vs 46.0%; P = .03) and were more likely to have high medication use (59.3% vs 44.4%; P = .047), more emergency department (ED; 0.8 vs 0.4; P = .03) and primary care visits (4.0 vs 3.0; P = .018), and longer cumulative time in the hospital (4.6 vs 2.5 days; P = .03) within 180 days of the index hospitalization. Multivariable analysis indicated that only cognitive impairment and previous ED visits were important predictors of readmission.CONCLUSIONSNo single CTP component reliably predicted reduced readmission risk. Patients with cognitive impairment and polypharmacy derived the most benefit from the program.

Background and objectives Withdrawal from maintenance hemodialysis before death has become more common because of high disease and treatment burden. The study objective was to identify patient factors and examine the terminal course associated with hemodialysis withdrawal, and assess patterns of palliative care involvement before death among patients on maintenance hemodialysis. Design, setting, participants, & measurements We designed an observational cohort study of adult patients on incident hemodialysis in a midwestern United States tertiary center, from January 2001 to November 2013, with death events through to November 2015. Logistic regression models evaluated associations between patient characteristics and withdrawal status and palliative care service utilization. Results Among 1226 patients, 536 died and 262 (49% of 536) withdrew. A random sample (10%; 52 out of 536) review of Death Notification Forms revealed 73% sensitivity for withdrawal. Risk factors for withdrawal before death included older age, white race, palliative care consultation within 6 months, hospitalization within 30 days, cerebrovascular disease, and no coronary artery disease. Most withdrawal decisions were made by patients (60%) or a family member (33%; surrogates). The majority withdrew either because of acute medical complications (51%) or failure to thrive/frailty (22%). After withdrawal, median time to death was 7 days (interquartile range, 4–11). In-hospital deaths were less common in the withdrawal group (34% versus 46% nonwithdrawal, P =0.003). A third (34%; 90 out of 262) of those that withdrew received palliative care services. Palliative care consultation in the withdrawal group was associated with longer hemodialysis duration (odds ratio, 1.19 per year; 95% confidence interval, 1.10 to 1.3; P <0.001), hospitalization within 30 days of death (odds ratio, 5.78; 95% confidence interval, 2.62 to 12.73; P <0.001), and death in hospital (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.13 to 3.27; P =0.02). Conclusions In this single-center study, the rate of hemodialysis withdrawals were twice the frequency previously described. Acute medical complications and frailty appeared to be driving factors. However, palliative care services were used in only a minority of patients.

Background: Care transitions programs have been shown to reduce hospital readmissions. Objectives: The main objective of this study was to evaluate effects of the Mayo Clinic Care Transitions (MCCTs) Program on potentially preventable and nonpreventable 30-day unplanned readmissions among high-risk elders. Research Design: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients enrolled in MCCT following hospitalization and propensity score-matched controls receiving usual primary care. Subjects: The subjects were primary care patients, who were 60 years or older, at high-risk for readmission, and hospitalized for any cause between January 1, 2011 and June 30, 2013. Measures: Hospital readmission within 30 days. The 3M algorithm was used to identify potentially preventable readmissions. Readmissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions, a subset of preventable readmissions identified by the 3M algorithm, were also assessed. Results: The study cohort included 365 pairs of MCCT enrollees and propensity score-matched controls. Patients were similar in age (mean 83 y) and other baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, including reason for index hospitalization. MCCT enrollees had a significantly lower all-cause readmission rate [12.4% (95% confidence interval: CI, 8.9–15.7) vs. 20.1% (15.8–24.1); P=0.004] resulting from a decrease in potentially preventable readmissions [8.4% (95% CI, 5.5–11.3) vs. 14.3% (95% CI, 10.5–17.9); P=0.01]. Few potentially preventable readmissions were for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (6.7% vs. 12.0%). The rates of nonpotentially preventable readmissions were similar [4.3% (95% CI, 2.2–6.5) vs. 6.7% (95% CI, 4.0–9.4); P=0.16]. Potentially preventable readmissions were reduced by 44% (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36–0.88; P=0.01) with no change in other readmissions. Conclusions: The MCCT significantly reduces preventable readmissions, suggesting that access to multidisciplinary care can reduce readmissions and improve outcomes for high-risk elders.

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure and do-not-intubate or comfort-measures-only orders. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to January 1, 2017. Study Selection: Studies of all design types that enrolled patients in the ICU or hospital ward who received noninvasive ventilation and had preset do-not-intubate or comfort-measures-only orders. Data Extraction: Data abstraction followed Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Data quality was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data Synthesis: Twenty-seven studies evaluating 2,020 patients with do-not-intubate orders and three studies evaluating 200 patients with comfort-measures-only orders were included. In patients with do-not-intubate orders, the pooled survival was 56% (95% CI, 49–64%) at hospital discharge and 32% (95% CI, 21–45%) at 1 year. Hospital survival was 68% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 68% for pulmonary edema, 41% for pneumonia, and 37% for patients with malignancy. Survival was comparable for patients treated in a hospital ward versus an ICU. Quality of life of survivors was not reduced compared with baseline, although few studies evaluated this. No studies evaluated quality of dying in nonsurvivors. In patients with comfort-measures-only orders, a single study showed that noninvasive ventilation was associated with mild reductions in dyspnea and opioid requirements. Conclusions: A large proportion of patients with do-not-intubate orders who received noninvasive ventilation survived to hospital discharge and at 1 year, with limited data showing no decrease in quality of life in survivors. Provision of noninvasive ventilation in a well-equipped hospital ward may be a viable alternative to the ICU for selected patients. Crucial questions regarding quality of life in survivors, quality of death in nonsurvivors, and the impact of noninvasive ventilation in patients with comfort-measures-only orders remain largely unanswered.