Fischer, Karen M.

Purpose The purpose of the present study was to investigate body mass index, multi-morbidity, and COVID-19 Risk Score as predictors of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Patients Patients from this study are from a well-characterized patient cohort collected at Mayo Clinic between January 1, 2020 and May 23, 2020; with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis defined as a positive result on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assays from nasopharyngeal swab specimens. Measures Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical record. The data included: date of birth, gender, ethnicity, race, marital status, medications (active COVID-19 agents), weight and height (from which the Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated, history of smoking, and comorbid conditions to calculate the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and the U.S Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) multi-morbidity score. An additional COVID-19 Risk Score was also included. Outcomes included hospital admission, ICU admission, and death. Results Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the impact on mortality or hospital admission. Age, sex, and race (white/Latino, white/non-Latino, other, did not disclose) were adjusted for in the model. Patients with higher COVID-19 Risk Scores had a significantly higher likelihood of being at least admitted to the hospital (HR = 1.80; 95% CI = 1.30, 2.50; P < .001), or experiencing death or inpatient admission (includes ICU admissions) (HR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.02, 1.42; P = .028). Age was the only statistically significant demographic predictor, but obesity was not a significant predictor of any of the outcomes. Conclusion Age and COVID-19 Risk Scores were significant predictors of severe COVID-19 outcomes. Further work should examine the properties of the COVID-19 Risk Factors Scale.

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.

Objective To describe the process and outcome of creating a patient cohort in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in order to better understand the process of and predict the outcomes of COVID-19. Patients and Methods A total of 1169 adults aged 18 years of age or older who tested positive in Mayo Clinic Rochester or the Mayo Clinic Midwest Health System between January 1 and May 23 of 2020. Results Patients were on average 43.9 years of age and 50.7% were female. Most patients were white (69.0%), and Blacks (23.4%) and Asians (5.8%) were also represented in larger numbers. Hispanics represented 16.3% of the sample. Just under half of patients were married (48.4%). Common comorbid conditions included: cardiovascular diseases (25.1%), dyslipidemia (16.0%), diabetes mellitus (11.2%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (6.6%), asthma (7.5%), and cancer (5.1%). All other comorbid conditions were less the 5% in prevalence. Data on 3 comorbidity indices are also available including the: DHHS multi-morbidity score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and Mayo Clinic COVID-19 Risk Factor Score. Conclusion In addition to managing the ever raging pandemic and growing death rates, it is equally important that we develop adequate resources for the investigation and understanding of COVID-19-related predictors and outcomes.

Objective To estimate the health care workers (HCWs) self-reported stress, resilience, and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to determine inter-professional differences. Participants and Methods An email survey was sent to 474 HCW at a Midwestern HealthCare facility between April 9, 2020 and April 30, 2020. A total of 311 (65.6%) responses were received by May 31, 2020. The survey utilized 3 validated instruments: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), Brief Resilience Coping Scale (BRCS). Results Of the 311 responses, 302 were evaluated: 97 from nonmedical staff with patient contact (NMPC); 86 from nonmedical staff with no patient contact (NMNPC); 62 from medical doctors (MD), physician assistants (PA) and nurse practitioners (NP); and 57 from nurses. Significant differences were noted across job categories for stress and resilience, with nurses reporting highest PSS scores (effect estimates: −2.72, P = .009 for NMNPC; −2.50, P = .015 for NMPC; −3.21, P = .006 for MD/NP/PA respectively), and MD/NP/PA group with highest BRS scores: nurses (−0.31, P = .02); NMPC (−0.3333, P = .01); and NMNPC (−0.2828, P = .02). Younger personnel had higher stress (−1.59 per decade of age, P < .01) and more resilience (0.11 per decade of age, P = .002). Conclusion These self-reported data indicate that MD/NP/PA had the highest resilience scores and the nurses had highest stress levels. Efforts are warranted to include all HCWs in systematic stress mitigating interventions with particular attention to understand specific factors contributing to stress for the nursing team.

Previous studies show that patient complaints can identify gaps in quality of care, but it is difficult to identify trends without categorization. We conducted a review of complaints relating to admissions on hospital internal medicine (HIM) services over a 26-month period. Data were collected on person characteristics and key features of the complaint. The complaints were also categorized into a previously published taxonomy. Seventy-six unsolicited complaints were identified, (3.5 per 1000 hospital admissions). Complaints were more likely on resident services. The mean duration between encounter and complaint was 18 days, and it took an average of 12 days to resolve the complaint. Most patients (59%) had a complaint in the Relationship domain. Thirty-nine percent of complaints mentioned a specific clinician. When a clinician was mentioned, complaints regarding communication and humaneness predominated (68%). The results indicate that the efforts to reduce patient complaints in HIM should focus on the Relationships domain.

Abstract Aims Elevated cardiac filling pressures producing clinical congestion in heart failure (HF) patients may be secondary to intravascular volume expansion or abnormalities in cardiac diastolic properties. The objective of this study was to assess the extent to which measures of myocardial function and intravascular volume correlate with haemodynamic abnormalities in chronic HF. Methods and results Subjects underwent invasive haemodynamic assessment, measurement of total blood volume (TBV) using radiolabel indicator‐dilution methodology, and echocardiography to evaluate cardiac structure and function. Patients were divided into those with hypervolaemia (defined as TBV > +8% above referenced normal volume) and normal volume (‘euvolaemia’) (TBV ≤ + 8%). Of 66 patients, 39 (59%) were hypervolaemic and 27 (41%) normal TBV. Central venous pressure (CVP, P = 0.01) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP, P < 0.001) were higher in hypervolaemic compared with euvolaemic patients; however, 15% of hypervolaemic patients displayed normal pressures. Of euvolaemic patients, 70% displayed elevated CVP and 63% elevated PCWP. PCWP was moderately correlated with TBV (r = 0.42), left ventricular diastolic function (e′ velocity, r = −0.44), and left atrial strain (r = −0.47). In multivariable regression TBV, left ventricular e′, and left atrial strain were independently associated with PCWP (all P < 0.05). Conclusions While hypervolaemic patients displayed elevations in filling pressures, a substantial proportion (15%) had normal pressures, and of all subjects with elevated filling pressures nearly one third had normal TBVs. Importantly, of patients with normal volumes, a majority (>60%) display elevated filling pressures. Combined analysis of volume, pressure, and cardiac function may be helpful to guide comprehensive assessments of HF status.

Objective: Clinical decision support systems (CDDSs) in the electronic medical record (EMR) have been implemented in primary care settings to identify patients due for cancer screening tests, while functioning as a real time reminder system. There is little known about primary care providers (PCPs) perspective or user acceptance of CDSS. The purpose of this study was to investigate primary care provider perceptions of utilizing CDSS alerts in the EMR to promote increased screening rates for breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colorectal cancer. Methods: An electronic survey was administered to PCPs in a Midwest Health Institution community internal medicine practice from September 25, 2019 through November 27, 2019. Results: Among 37 participants (9 NP/Pas and 28 MD/DOs), the NP/PA group was more likely to agree that alerts were helpful (50%; P-value = .0335) and the number of alerts (89%; P = .0227) in the EMR was appropriate. The NP/PA group also was more likely to find alerts straightforward to use (78%, P = .0239). Both groups agreed about feeling comfortable using the health maintenance alerts ( MD/DO = 79%; NP/PA = 100%). Conclusion: CDSSs can promote and facilitate ordering of cancer screening tests. The use of technology can promptly identify patients due for a test and act as a reminder to the PCP. PCPs identify these alerts to be a beneficial tool in the EMR when they do not interrupt workflow and provide value to patient care. More work is needed to identify factors that could optimize alerts to be even more helpful, particularly to MD/DO groups.