Citations

Abstract Objective: To retrospectively observe procalcitonin (PCT) and antibiotic ordering practices in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Design: Retrospective, exact matched, multicenter cohort study from October 1, 2018 – March 31, 2023. Setting: All hospitals across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise. Participants: Adult patients with CAP, identified using pneumonia diagnosis codes and receipt of systemic antibiotics with an indication of “respiratory tract infection” within 48 hours of hospitalization. Methods: PCT testing within the first 7 days of hospitalization was compared to non-PCT care (nPCT). The primary outcomes were treatment duration, antibiotic days of therapy (DOT), and length of stay (LOS). Results: 15364 patients met inclusion criteria. PCT testing occurred in 42.4% (6515/15364) of encounters, totaling 8214 PCT results. 12880 unique patient encounters were matched 1:1, 6440 in each group. Treatment duration was longer in the PCT group compared to the nPCT group (5.1 vs 4.6 days, respectively, P < 0.001). Patients in the PCT group also received more DOT (8.6 vs 7.6 DOT, P < 0.001) and had a longer LOS (6.8 vs 5.9 days, P < 0.001), respectively. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality or C. difficile infection between groups. In a sensitivity analysis of nPCT patients compared to those with a peak value <0.25 ng/mL (i.e. normal result) there was no difference in treatment duration (4.6 days nPCT vs 4.7 days normal PCT, P = 0.104) or LOS (5.9 days nPCT vs 6.0 days normal PCT, P = 0.134). Conclusion: PCT testing in patients hospitalized with CAP was not associated with reduced antimicrobial utilization, LOS, or 30-day all-cause mortality.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to establish a set of guiding principles for data sharing and harmonization in critical care, focusing on the use of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) to improve patient outcomes and research efficacy. The principles were developed through a systematic literature review and a modified Delphi process, with the goal of enhancing data accessibility, standardization, and interoperability across critical care settings. DATA SOURCES: Data sources included a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed literature, specifically studies related to the use of RWD and RWE in healthcare, guidelines, best practices, and recommendations on data sharing and harmonization. A total of 8150 articles were initially identified through databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science, with 257 studies meeting inclusion criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria focused on publications discussing health-related informatics, recommendations for RWD/RWE usage, data sharing, and harmonization principles. Exclusion criteria ruled out non-human studies, case studies, conference abstracts, and articles published before 2013, as well as those not available in English. DATA EXTRACTION: From the 257 selected studies, 322 statements were extracted. After removing irrelevant definitions and off-topic content, 232 statements underwent content validation and thematic analysis. These statements were then consolidated into 24 candidate guiding principles after rigorous review and consensus-building among the expert panel. DATA SYNTHESIS: A three-phase modified Delphi process was employed, involving a conceptualization group, a review group, and a Delphi group. In phase 1, experts identified key themes and search terms for the systematic review. Phase 2 involved validating and refining the prospective guiding principles, while phase 3 employed a Delphi panel to rate principles on acceptability, importance, and feasibility. This process resulted in 24 guiding principles, with high consensus achieved in rounds 2 and 3 on their relevance and applicability. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic review and Delphi process resulted in 24 guiding principles to improve data sharing and harmonization in critical care. These principles address challenges across the data lifecycle, including generation, storage, access, and usage of RWD and RWE. This framework is designed to promote more effective and equitable data practices, with relevance for the development of artificial intelligence-based decision support tools and clinical research. The principles are intended to guide the responsible use of data science in critical care, with emphasis on ethics and equity, while acknowledging the variability of resources across settings.

OBJECTIVES: To develop the first core Critical Care Data Dictionary (C2D2) with common data elements (CDEs) to characterize critical illness and injuries. DESIGN: Group consensus process using modified Delphi approach. SETTING: Electronic surveys and in-person meetings. SUBJECTS: A multidisciplinary workgroup of clinicians and researchers with expertise in the care of the critically ill and injured. INTERVENTIONS: The Delphi process was divided into domain and CDE portions with each composed of two item generation rounds and one item reduction/refinement rounds. Two in-person meetings augmented this process to facilitate review and consideration of the domains and by panel members. The final set of domains and CDEs was then reviewed by the group to meet the competing criteria of utility and feasibility, resulting in the core dataset. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The 23-member Delphi panel was provided 1833 candidate variables for potential dataset inclusion. The final dataset includes 226 patient-level CDCs in nine domains, which include anthropometrics and demographics (8), chronic comorbid illnesses (18), advanced directives (1), ICU diagnoses (61), diagnostic tests (42), interventions (27), medications (38), objective assessments (26), and hospital course and outcomes (5). Upon final review, 91% of the panel endorsed the CDCs as meeting criteria for a minimum viable data dictionary. Data elements cross the lifespan of neonate through adult patients. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting C2D2 provides a foundation to facilitate rapid collection, analyses, and dissemination of information necessary for research, quality improvement, and clinical practice to optimize critical care outcomes. Further work is needed to validate the effectiveness of the dataset in a variety of critical care settings.

Abstract Rationale Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The extent of medication nonadherence in PAH is uncertain and may be linked to adverse outcomes. There has been a lack of multicenter, registry-based studies assessing medication nonadherence and patient-centered outcomes in PAH. Objectives To determine the prevalence of self-reported nonadherence in Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry (PHAR) participants with PAH or chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension and the relationship of nonadherence with several patient-centered outcomes (mortality, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, and health-related quality of life). Methods Self-reported PAH medication nonadherence was captured at PHAR enrollment and during follow-up visits. Predictors of nonadherence were modeled using generalized estimating equations assuming a binary distribution. Outcomes associated with nonadherence were modeled using generalized estimating equations with a Poisson distribution. Results A total of 1,543 patients were included, of whom 1,092 (70.8%) were female and 1,340 (86.8%) had PAH. The overall rate of any self-reported nonadherence was 6.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.3–6.9). Predictors of nonadherence included self-reported male sex at birth (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0–1.9; P = 0.02), poverty (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2–2.3; P = 0.01), not being married or partnered (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1–1.9; P = 0.01), having Medicaid or no health insurance (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.5–2.9; P &lt; 0.001), and having completed high school but not having a college degree (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1–2.9; P &lt; 0.001). PHAR participants who reported any nonadherence had 50.0% more emergency department visits (P &lt; 0.001), 13.3% more hospital admissions (P = 0.03), and 61.9% more days hospitalized (P = 0.01). No relationship was observed between nonadherence and the type or number of PAH therapies or all-cause mortality. Participants reporting nonadherence had worse mean Short Form-12 scores (P &lt; 0.001) and worse emPHasis-10 scores (P = 0.02). Conclusions The rate of self-reported nonadherence in PHAR registrants was low but was associated with male sex and several social determinants of health. Although the complexity or type of PAH regimen did not appear to influence nonadherence, nonadherence was associated with numerous adverse patient-centered outcomes, including greater healthcare use and worse health-related quality of life. Because of limitations in the structure of the gathered data, relationships between exposure and outcomes were not temporally definitive; these observations warrant additional prospective studies.

Objectives Evaluate the training background of surgeons performing high volumes of cochlear implants (CIs) and estimate the ratio of providers trained in otology/neurotology (O&N) to the number of traditional CI candidates and audiologists. Methods A retrospective review of US surgeon registration data from a single CI manufacturer was performed to determine CI volume based on surgeon training. The prevalence of traditional candidates for CIs was estimated from US census population data and compared with the number of O&N providers. The ratio of audiologists to O&N providers was estimated from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics and American Speech‐Language‐Hearing Association databases. Results From 2021 to 2023, a mean of 88% of providers performing ≥25 CIs per year and 90% performing ≥40 per year had training in O&N. All surgeons registering ≥100 implants per year were O&N providers. The mean percentage of O&N providers performing ≥25 CIs per year and ≥ 40 per year was higher than the percentage of General and Pediatric Otolaryngology providers performing the same volume: mean difference = 76%, p < 0.001 and mean difference = 79%, p < 0.001, respectively. The mean estimated prevalence of traditional CI candidates per O&N provider is 3,354 with an estimated mean of 32 audiologists (3.5 trained in CIs) per O&N provider. Conclusion 88% of high‐volume CI surgeons have fellowship training in O&N. To meet the current state of CI underutilization and anticipated growing population of CI candidates, we propose increasing the surgical capacity of O&N providers and the number of surgeons proficient in CIs. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope , 135:2146–2153, 2025