Citations

Introduction/Objectives: Little is known about the prevalence of patient-reported social risk factors and the use of the HOUSES Index, a simple, reliable method of assessing socioeconomic status (SES) based on publicly available housing data, in a predominantly rural, primary care population. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of adult patients paneled to family medicine clinicians in a US Midwest health system as of December 31, 2022. Patients’ listed address determined HOUSES Index as quartile rank (Q1 lowest SES) and rural/urban status. Social risk data including housing, food, transportation, finances, and violence were collected from health record questionnaires. A mixed effect model was used to assess associations between social risk, HOUSES Index, and rurality. Results: Of the 352 355 patients included, rural patients were more likely than urban patients to report all social risk factors and had lower SES as measured by HOUSES quartiles. In the mixed effects analysis, HOUSES quartile was independently predictive of reporting an at-risk social risk factor (Q1 vs Q4 OR = 2.27, 95% CI = 2.19-2.37), but rurality was not (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.97-1.07) after adjusting for HOUSES. Conclusions: The increased prevalence of social risk factors among rural residents is largely explained by individual SES measured by HOUSES Index.

ABSTRACT Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most common and difficult to treat form of arthroplasty failure. While treatment with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is preferable to one- or two-stage implant exchange based on morbidity and cost, outcomes are not successful in all cases selected for this management strategy. DAIR is currently recommended when infection is perceived to be in an “acute” phase, based on symptom duration; despite this selection strategy, DAIR failure rates are high. A more objective means of predicting DAIR success could improve patient outcomes by limiting DAIR failures. To explore this possibility, advanced proteomic analysis of sonicate fluid samples from 95 subjects with PJI was performed using proximity extension assay (PEA), with 77 samples additionally undergoing complementary proteomics analysis with liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Sparse partial least squares differentiation analysis (sPLS-DA) separated samples from patients who underwent DAIR with known outcomes ( n = 19) into successful or unsuccessful groups, predicting DAIR surgical outcome (area under the curve [AUC]: 1; mean “leave one out” AUC: 0.6). Proteins predictive of DAIR surgical outcome were significantly enriched for the “protein repair” Gene Ontology (GO) pathway ( P -adj = 0.02). Additionally, proteomic signatures associated with symptom duration in PJI categorized samples into short and long symptom duration PJI. In summary, an investigation of 7,261 unique human proteins separated PJI-associated samples based on symptom duration and identified a proteomic profile predictive of DAIR success. IMPORTANCE Chronic infections are generally understood to last months to years, with acute infections lasting days to weeks. The transition from acute to chronic infection is, however, poorly understood. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been considered more challenging to treat when “chronic” than when “acute.” A surgery preferred for its recovery time and cost—debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR)—is recommended for PJI management when symptom duration is short; yet, even in this select patient group, DAIR is associated with a high treatment failure rate. A means to better identify those predicted to have a successful outcome if they undergo DAIR is needed. Here, over 7,000 proteins from human clinical PJI samples were measured and shown to be able to separate samples based on symptom duration. Importantly, a proteomic profile predictive of DAIR success was identified.

Background Although telehealth cardiac rehabilitation (CR) may improve access, there are concerns about its long‐term effectiveness and impact on equity as compared with in‐person CR. Our objective was to tailor a patient‐centered telehealth CR program for diverse populations. Methods CR patients and caregivers were recruited between January and September 2023 from 4 US academic medical centers. Participants engaged in human‐centered design sessions to iteratively refine a telehealth CR program. Sessions had planned topics, but there was variation across sites to account for site‐specific needs and participant feedback. Sessions were qualitatively analyzed using rapid template analysis with preselected behavioral science constructs and other emergent codes. Results The study included 21 participants (71% aged ≥60 years, 48% women, 62% non‐Hispanic White individuals; 90% CR patients, 10% CR caregivers). Participants thought that telehealth CR could be helpful for personalized support at home and convenience but recognized that technology is not always easy to use. Some expressed concerns about the safety of telehealth CR, especially at the beginning, and desired monitoring through a mobile device or video observation of exercise. Safety protocols and technology training were developed, which addressed concerns about telehealth CR. Opportunities for social support with telehealth CR were also desired. From these findings, an implementation toolkit was developed, including a graphic program description, safety plan, home exercise plan for during and after CR, and scripts for technology training and individual and group telehealth visits. Conclusions A patient‐centered telehealth CR program and implementation toolkit were systematically tailored to address the needs of diverse populations.

AbstractElectronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) can improve care for people with cancer, but effectiveness hinges on well-supported integration in clinical settings.We evaluated clinician use of specific clinical decision support (CDS) tools in the electronic health record (EHR) designed to facilitate timely, clinically appropriate responses to ePROM scores for six symptoms commonly experienced by cancer patients.The parent pragmatic trial, which took place at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota, United States) and its affiliated community health care system between March 2019 and January 2023, evaluated the population-level effectiveness and implementation of an ePROM surveillance and EHR-facilitated collaborative care symptom management intervention. The present evaluation used a case study approach with four data sources: (1) clinician interactions with CDS tools abstracted from the EHR; (2) clinician notes identified with an institution-specific textual search tool; (3) qualitative interviews and group discussions with care teams; and (4) administrative records reviewed to identify training and outreach to care teams.EHR metrics showed very low adoption of CDS tools including alerts and symptom-specific order sets, despite educational outreach and information technology support provided to clinical care teams. Qualitative findings revealed that CDS use was not easy to integrate into busy clinical workflows and highlighted clinician perceptions that the collaborative care intervention provided additional patient support that reduced clinicians' need to utilize CDS tools. They also highlight the importance of contextual factors, including institutional priorities and EHR changes.This pragmatic clinical trial case study found limited adoption of EHR CDS tools that had been developed to increase clinicians' awareness of and responses to ePROM data. Findings suggest the need to align clinician and organizational implementation strategies, simplify CDS tools to fit practice expectations, and identify and address contextual factors that could undercut strategies like education and peer support. This may be especially important for teams who aim to iteratively evaluate and refine CDS and implementation strategies for multicomponent interventions or introduce new strategies that are responsive to barriers while maintaining scalability.

Abstract Background Compared to Parkinson's disease, atypical parkinsonian disorders (APD) are characterized by a more rapidly progressive course, often leading to profound disability. Effective communication between clinicians, patients, and care partners is essential to support patient‐centered care and shared decision‐making. However, most neurologists lack formal training in serious illness conversations (SIC). Objective To develop a practical SIC guide tailored to the needs of individuals with APD. Methods Members of the CurePSP Centers of Care Palliative Care Working Group, in collaboration with a SIC education expert (TC), developed a SIC guide for APD. A literature review was conducted, followed by online consensus‐building rounds. Results Applying core communication principles—such as active listening, pausing, naming and validating emotions, assessing understanding, and reframing—can foster alignment between clinicians, patients, and their care partners. Navigating the balance between maintaining hope and providing realistic, anticipatory guidance remains challenging but best achieved by honest, compassionate dialogue. Four practical guides were developed, addressing common and often challenging scenarios: delivering an APD diagnosis, eliciting patient goals in the context of changing clinical status, addressing safety concerns, and discussing quality of life and end‐of‐life considerations. Conclusions Patients and their care partners living with APD benefit greatly from individualized guidance, and honest, empathic communication is a vital part of patient‐centered care. While existing SIC frameworks offer valuable foundations, further research is needed to optimize their adaptation for APD—identifying best timing, specific frameworks, relevant outcome measures, and education strategies to build team‐wide competency.

This cross-sectional study analyzes patient-reported outcome findings from the Enhanced, Electronic Health Record–Facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) trial to investigate level of symptom burden in adolescents and young adults with cancer.

Purpose: To evaluate the role of women physicians in thyroid eye disease (TED) research and clinical care and describe relevance for academic medicine and patient access. Methods: A cross-sectional study of TED-related publications indexed on PubMed in 2000, 2010, and 2020, and of completed or currently active clinical trials was conducted. Author, journal, and principal investigator (PI) characteristics were noted. Author/PI gender was determined from institutional profile or subsequently via a previously described Google-based algorithm. American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS), American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO), and American Thyroid Association (ATA) information was obtained via direct communication. Trends in participation of men and women were evaluated. Results: A total of 444 manuscripts (61 from 2000; 117 from 2010; 266 from 2020) were included. The percentage of women as first and senior authors increased from 2000 to 2020 (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, resp.). First author gender distribution was near equal in 2020 (52.6% men, 47.4% women [p = 0.39]), whereas senior authors remained mostly men (68.0% men, 32.0% women [p < 0.0001]). As of 2020, the gender imbalance of senior authors was greater on multidisciplinary author teams (74.8% men, 25.2% women) compared with single specialty author teams (62.2% men, 37.8% women). Of the 98 TED-related clinical trials included, 34 had women PIs (35%). The percentage of women as members in ASOPRS, ABO, and ATA all increased significantly from 2000 to 2020, but remained disproportionately men in 2020 (all p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Gender-based discrepancies persist in TED research, especially among senior authors, who determine research direction, and on multidisciplinary teams, which reflect the preferred model of care. Further efforts are required to determine whether these findings affect patients with TED.

Abstract The cumulative impact of baseline comorbidities on outcomes of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy is not well established. Therefore, we developed and validated a Cellular Therapy Comorbidity Index (CT-CI) to predict outcomes following CD19-directed CAR-T therapy for large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Patients aged 18 or older receiving commercial CAR-T therapy for LBCL during 2017 to 2020 were selected from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry. Patients were randomly assigned to training or validation cohorts. Comorbidities given weighted scores comprised the CT-CI, which was then validated for overall survival (OS) prognostication. A total of 1916 patients from 97 medical centers were included, with a median age of 64 years (19-91 years). About 70% of patients had comorbidities, such as cardiac disease (12%); diabetes (14%); hepatic dysfunction (mild, 8%; moderate to severe, 2%); psychiatric disturbance (18%); and pulmonary dysfunction (moderate, 15%; severe, 12%). The CT-CI was calculated, stratified patients in 3 categories, and was associated with increased mortality. Patients with higher CT-CI scores had worse OS (CT-CI 1: hazard ratio [HR], 1.37 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.62; P&lt; .001]; CT-CI 2: HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.17-1.89; P = .001]; CT-CI ≥ 3: HR, 2.55 [95% CI, 1.90-3.42; P&lt; .001]). Higher CT-CI scores predicted treatment-related mortality and relapse. There was no correlation between the CT-CI score and CAR-T–related toxicities. The novel CT-CI score stratifies the effect of patient comorbidities on survival after CAR-T therapy and can be used for clinical decision-making and treatment selection in high-risk populations. However, comorbidities and fear of increased toxicity should not preclude patients from this effective therapy.

Background: Surgeons often recommend weight loss for patients with obesity before total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, it is unknown whether preoperative weight loss affects outcomes. The goals of this study were to determine how many patients with obesity lost weight before TKA, to identify weight loss predictors, and to evaluate if preoperative weight loss affected postoperative outcomes. Methods: Among 23,726 primary TKAs performed between 2002 and 2019, we identified 3,665 patients who had a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m 2 measured 1 to 24 months before surgery and had a weight measured at surgery. The mean patient age was 68 years, and 59% of patients were female. The mean patient BMI was 36 kg/m 2 . Univariable linear regressions evaluated weight loss predictors. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the impact of preoperative weight change on discharge, operative time, periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), complications, revisions, and reoperations. The mean follow-up was 6 years. Results: Overall, 20% of patients gained ≥5 pounds (1 pound = 0.45 kg), 39% maintained weight, 17% lost 5 to <10 pounds, 15% lost 10 to <20 pounds, and 9% lost ≥20 pounds before TKA. Male patients lost slightly more weight (−4.6 pounds) than female patients (−4.3 pounds) (p = 0.05). In univariable analyses, gaining >5 pounds was associated with increased odds of extended hospital length of stay (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; p = 0.01) and risk of complications (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7; p < 0.01). Losing 10 to <20 pounds was associated with increased risks of revision (HR, 2.0; p = 0.01), PJI (HR, 3.1; p < 0.01), and complications (HR, 1.6; p = 0.03). In multivariable analyses, compared with maintaining weight, losing 10 to <20 pounds was associated with an increased risk of PJI (HR, 2.6; p = 0.01), whereas gaining >5 pounds was associated with an increased risk of complications (HR, 1.5; p = 0.03). Conclusions: Few patients with obesity lost substantial weight before primary TKA, and reaching common preoperative weight loss goals was not associated with improved outcomes. Although a healthy weight is important for general health, weight loss before TKA may not be sufficient to improve postoperative outcomes for most patients with obesity. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.