Ganesh, Ravindra

1503 Background: Patients with cancer and COVID-19 are at risk for poor clinical outcomes. An established multi-site remote patient monitoring (RPM) service was rapidly adapted to support a novel, interdisciplinary COVID-19 program for outpatient management of patients at high-risk for severe illness. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of the RPM program on clinical outcomes and acute care utilization in cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Methods: This is a cross-sectional analysis following a multi-site prospective observational study performed at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (MCCC). All adult patients with active cancer – defined as currently receiving cancer-directed therapy or in recent remission on active surveillance – and PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 18 and July 31, 2020 were included. RPM was comprised of in-home technology to assess symptoms and physiologic data with centralized nurse and physician oversight. Results: During the study timeframe 224 cancer patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 at MCCC. Initial management included urgent hospitalization (within 48 hours of diagnosis) in 34 patients (15%). Of the remaining 190 patients (85%) initially managed in the outpatient setting, those who did not receive RPM were significantly more likely to experience hospitalization than those receiving RPM (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.036 to 12.01, P = 0.044). Following balancing of patient characteristics by inverse propensity weighting, rates of hospital admission for RPM and non-RPM patients were 3.1% and 11% respectively, implying that RPM was associated with an 8% reduction in hospital admission rate (-0.077; 95% CI: -0.315 to -0.019, P = 0.009). Use of RPM was also associated with lower rates of prolonged hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality, though these trends did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: In the midst of a global pandemic associated with inpatient bed, ventilator, and PPE shortages, the RPM program provided an effective strategy for outpatient clinical management and was associated with decreased rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality in cancer patients with COVID-19. This care model enabled simultaneous opportunity to mitigate the increased risks of exposure, transmission, and resource utilization associated with conventional care.

Background The clinical outcomes of patients who decline anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is not known. Factors associated with the decision to accept or decline the offer for anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies are not established. This study aimed to identify factors impacting the decision to consent for monoclonal antibody therapies and assess the differences in clinical outcomes of patients who accepted compared to those who declined these therapies. Methods This retrospective cohort study enrolled 2820 adult patients who were offered monoclonal antibody therapies, bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab, for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic in the Midwest between 11/19/2020 and 12/31/2020. The primary endpoint is the decision to accept or decline monoclonal antibody treatment. Secondary endpoints were patient-level factors that could have impacted the decision to accept treatment (age, gender, race, ethnicity, primary language spoken, and medical comorbidities). The main clinical endpoint was hospitalization within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results 59.1% (n = 1669) chose to accept monoclonal antibody therapy, and 40.9% (n = 1151) chose to decline the offer for treatment. Patients were more likely to accept treatment if they were non-Hispanic White, English speaking, identified a spouse or life partner, had a religious affiliation, and possessed more medical comorbidities. Overall, 28-day hospitalization rate was 2.6% (n = 72/2820) and was higher among those who declined (3.3%) than those who accepted monoclonal antibody therapy (2.0%; Rate Ratio = 0.62, 95% Confidence Interval, 0.39-0.98). Conclusions Despite having more comorbidities, patients who accepted monoclonal antibody treatments had a lower rate of hospitalization compared to patients who declined treatment. Several social and cultural factors were associated with the decision to decline therapy, including race, language, ethnicity, and lack of social support. These findings can inform public health efforts to reduce social disparities in the treatment of COVID-19 and increase utilization of monoclonal antibody therapies in high risk populations.

Objective The purpose of this study was to determine self-reported knowledge, attitudes, prior experience, and perceived needs for the management of overweight and obese patients within a General Internal Medicine Practice. Patients and Methods An emailed cross-sectional survey was sent between June 20, 2019 and September 12, 2019 to 194 healthcare workers (93 primary care providers (PCPs) and 101 nurses) which focused on management of patients with weight issues. Results In total, 80 of the eligible 194 participants completed the survey (nurses = 42, PCPs = 38). Up to 87% were white, 74.7% female (74.7%). Most of the responders were either in the age group of 30’s (30%) or 50’s (30%). Among the responders, 48.8% reported some type of specialty training in weight management since their medical training with lectures being the most common form of training (36%). When asked about their interest in either weight management training or strategies to initiate weight conversations, 79% of the respondents reported an interest in education on weight management or strategies to initiate weight conversations, while 65.8% indicated they would be interested in both topics. Conclusion Our study suggests that healthcare workers have a self-reported need for further training in management of overweight and obese patients, irrespective of previous training in this area.

Abstract Background Residents of nursing homes and long‐term care facilities are at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) but may not be able to access monoclonal antibody therapies offered at outpatient infusion centers due to frailty and logistical issues. We describe a mobile monoclonal antibody infusion program for patients with COVID‐19 in skilled nursing facilities and provide descriptive data on its outcomes. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Collaboration between Mayo Clinic and skilled nursing facilities in Southeast Minnesota was developed to administer anti‐spike monoclonal antibodies under the FDA Emergency Use Authorization. Participants Seventy five residents of skilled nursing facilities at high risk of COVID‐19 complications. Exposure Emergency use treatment with bamlanivimab and casirivimab–imdevimab. Measurements Hospitalization and medically attended visits. Results The mobile infusion unit, staffed by Mayo Clinic Infusion Therapy registered nurses and supported by the skilled nursing facility staff, infused anti‐spike monoclonal antibodies to 45 of 75 patients (average age, 77.8 years) in December 2020. The infusions occurred at an average of 4.3 days after COVID‐19 diagnosis. Fourteen days after infusion, there were no deaths, two emergency department visits, and three hospitalizations, for a combined event rate of 11.1%. There was one reported adverse event. Conclusion The implementation of a mobile infusion unit embedded in a collaborative process resulted in rapid infusion of monoclonal antibodies to high‐risk COVID‐19 patients in skilled nursing facilities, who would otherwise be unable to access the novel therapies. The therapies were well tolerated and appear beneficial. Further study is warranted to explore the scalability and efficacy of this program.

Pain is a major public health problem, causing heavy social and economic burdens to patients and society while consuming tremendous medical resources at the same time. Thus, there is a critical need to find low-cost, efficacious, and therapeutic approaches to help manage pain. While acupuncture is increasingly recognized as a promising pain-relieving method, less is known about a specific form of auricular acupuncture known as Battlefield Acupuncture (BFA). The BFA technique involves the sequential placement of semi-permanent, single-use, French ASP[Formula: see text] golden needles to five specific acupoints in one or both ears, where they are left in place for 3–4 days or longer [Niemtzow, R.C., Battlefield acupuncture. Med. Acupunct. 19: 225–228, 2007]. The BFA needles (more accurately described as tiny conical darts) pierce the ear in designated locations in a particular order [Levy, C.E., N. Casler and D.B. FitzGerald. Battlefield acupuncture: an emerging method for easing pain. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 97: e18–e19, 2018.]. (Figs. 4 and 5) It was developed by Dr. Richard C. Niemtzow in 2001, as a subgroup form of an auricular acupuncture technique based on the somatotopic arrangement of an inverted fetus pattern on the external ear [Romoli, M. Ear acupuncture: historical abstract–differences of ear cartography between the east and the west. Dtsch. Z. Akupunkt. 53: 24–33, 2010.]. Currently, BFA is widely used in the US military, but to our knowledge, there is no review which comprehensively synthesizes the current publications surrounding pain management. This review aims to investigate the effects and safety of BFA in adults with pain. Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English evaluating efficacy and safety of BFA in adults with pain, from database inception to September 6, 2019. The primary outcome was pain intensity change, and the secondary outcome was safety. Nine RCTs were included in this review, and five trials involving 344 participants were analyzed quantitatively. Compared with no intervention, usual care, sham BFA, and delayed BFA interventions, BFA had no significant improvement in the pain intensity felt by adults suffering from pain. Few adverse effects (AEs) were reported with BFA therapy, but they were mild and transitory. BFA is a safe, rapid, and easily learned acupuncture technique, mainly used in acute pain management, but no significant efficacy was found in adult individuals with pain, compared with the control groups. Given the poor methodological quality of the included studies, high-quality RCTs with rigorous evaluation methods are needed in the future.

Abstract Postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is a syndrome characterized by elevated heart rate without hypotension and most commonly occurs in young females (generally <35 years of age). The prevalence of POTS is on the rise, but the etiology is still under investigation, and there appear to be multiple potential physiologic causes. The majority of these patients experience a multitude of gastrointestinal (GI) and systemic symptoms and conditions that may contribute to functional debility and poor quality of life. Although symptoms generally improve with age, they can still lead to significant issues meeting nutrition and hydration needs. This paper summarizes the understood potential pathophysiology of POTS, associated GI and nutrition issues, general treatment of POTS, and strategies to assess and meet the unique nutrition and hydration needs of these patients.

The 2019 COVID-19 pandemic has thrown the global health-care system into a chaotic flux. Consolidating and reviewing all available knowledge will be crucial to combating the spread of this novel coronavirus. Prevention is paramount, but health care workers are at increased risk, and protective supplies are being limited and being rationed. Common symptoms include fever, cough, and shortness of breath. Hospitalizations are estimated to occur in about 20% of cases and are mostly due to pneumonia.[1] While multiple promising treatments are being reported in the medical literature; there is limited, reliable clinical data are available. To minimize exposure of medical staff to contagious patients and to provide rapid escalation of care to these patients, a telehealth strategy could be leveraged. Such a strategy would entail the use of both telemedicine visits for communication and digital health platforms for monitoring.

Abstract Background: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a common chronic pain condition that seriously affects the quality of patient lives. Its etiology, pathogenesis, and treatment still remain uncertain. Dietary supplements have been widely trialed for symptom relief for FM. The review aims to synthesize the previous literature publications to assess the impact of herbs and dietary supplements on FM patients. Methods: We will conduct a literature search in the following databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Global Health from database inception to December 2019. Clinical studies published in the English language that used human participants and address the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of herbs and dietary supplements on individuals with FM will be included. The risk of bias and quality assessment of each trial will be evaluated. If trials are enough, a meta-analysis will be conducted using software RevMan5.3, Cochrane Collaboration. Result: Our review will be the first attempt to facilitate evidence-based management using herbs and dietary supplements to treat patients with FM. Conclusion: The findings may provide a framework for future research and clinic practice in FM management. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020149941

Background Stress is highly prevalent in the U.S. society, especially in executives, and is a well-documented risk factor for a wide range of medical disorders. Knowledge of common sources of stress and predictive factors may help identify executives at risk of high stress and allow us to appropriately refer them for stress management treatment. Objective The primary aim of this study was to identify common sources of stress, predictors of high stress, and other correlates among executives. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey of executives who requested a stress management consult at our institution. We abstracted the data from a 14-item intake survey as well as from the patient interview. Results Of the 839 executives, 827 executives (98.6%) who were referred for individual stress management consults completed the stress-related questions of the survey; 51.3% of these executives reported having a high stress level. Study participants mostly struggled with the well-being measures of sleep, anxiety, energy level, and diet. The majority reported that their main stressor was work related (n = 540, 64.4%) followed by family related (n = 371, 44.2%), health related (n = 170, 20.3%), and work–life balance (n = 62, 7.4%). In unadjusted analysis, high stress was associated with younger age ( P = .006), lower quality-of-life scores ( P < .001), and less physical activity ( P < .001). In multivariable analyses, the strongest predictors for high stress level were younger age (odds ratios [OR] = 0.84, P = .045) and worse quality-of-life indicators such as anxiety (OR = 2.72, P < .001), diet (OR = 0.78, P = .02), and sleep (OR = 0.74, P < .003). Conclusion These findings suggest that executives with a high level of stress might be best helped through a multimodality stress management program. Our findings merit replication in larger studies and more definitive confirmation with prospective clinical trials.