Maxson, Julie

Objectives: We evaluated agreement between human papillomavirus (HPV) tests performed on self-collected vaginal and clinician-collected cervical specimens to advance HPV self-collection as a cervical cancer screening option in our health care system. Methods: This diagnostic accuracy study was conducted at an academic medical center. Participants were 25–65 years old with upcoming colposcopy appointments. One cohort (n = 79) self-collected a vaginal specimen in the clinic immediately before a clinician-collected cervical specimen. The second cohort (n = 115) self-collected a vaginal specimen at home, mailed it in, and had a clinician-collected cervical specimen in the clinic. Paired specimens were evaluated for total (TPA), positive (PPA), and negative (NPA) percentage agreement. Extreme temperature stability studies were also conducted. Results: Compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens, in-clinic self-collected vaginal specimens showed a TPA, PPA, and NPA of 98%, 100%, and 97% for HPV16; 99%, 100%, and 99% for HPV18; 86%, 94%, and 79% for high-risk other (HRO) HPV. The TPA, PPA, and NPA for at-home self-collected vaginal specimens compared with clinician-collected cervical specimens were 94%, 79%, and 96% for HPV16; 95%, 43%, and 98% for HPV18; 89%, 80%, and 93% for HRO. Vaginal specimens showed prolonged stability and were unaffected by extreme temperatures. Conclusions: In general, in-clinic and at-home self-collected vaginal HPV specimens for HPV screening demonstrate high agreement with clinician-collected cervical specimens, with the exception of low PPA in the at-home self-collected vaginal HPV18 subgroup. Our findings support the use of HPV self-collection as a practical option to expand access to cervical cancer screening.

Objectives: To assess how social risk factors and socioeconomic status (SES) affect health care costs at a large, integrated health system of 45 clinics in Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed administrative patient cost data from January 1 through December 31, 2022. Social risk factors (lack of financial resources, food insecurity, intimate partner violence, unmet transportation needs, and housing instability) were determined with patient questionnaires. Cost z -scores were compared across all risk-factor quartiles. We used a housing-based measure to objectively determine SES. Results: We analyzed data from 410 624 patients empaneled with 689 family medicine clinicians. Self-reported risk factor data were incomplete for 219 321 patients. Costs were higher for those with higher social risk (mean cost z -score: high risk = 0.38, low risk = 0.11; P < .001). In addition, higher costs were associated with increasing age, greater medical complexity (higher Adjusted Clinical Group scores), White race, and lack of financial resources. Although we observed geographic variations in cost, urban and rural locations did not have significant cost differences. Costs were similar across all quartiles of SES, and the absolute difference in cost z -scores between the highest and lowest SES quartiles was only 0.04. The multivariate analysis, which adjusted for age, medical complexity, race, sex, and objective SES, showed that these specific associations were substantially decreased and no longer significantly associated with mean cost z -scores. Conclusions: Patient-reported social risk factors were significantly associated with increased cost of care in a large, multispecialty health system in the midwestern US. These associations were decreased in the multivariate analysis. Results should be interpreted cautiously for readers outside the midwestern US, given potential responder bias and the racial homogeneity (92% White) of the study cohort.

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.

Background: Cervical cancer screening with a self-collected vaginal specimen for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in May 2024, offering a potential solution to declining screening rates. Objective: We aimed to assess acceptability of clinic-based vaginal specimen self-collection for HPV testing and to evaluate associations between participants’ sociodemographics and their likelihood of choosing self-collection for future screening and the overall acceptability of using the Evalyn® brush device. We also evaluated associations between specific acceptability constructs and reported likelihood to use the device in the future and overall acceptability. Methods: Following self-collection of a vaginal specimen, participants completed an electronic survey that measured constructs from the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Associations were assessed using logistic regressions. The study was conducted at a colposcopy clinic in the Gynecology department of a midwestern academic medical center in the United States from November 2022 through July 2023. Results: Participants ( n = 81) reported high likelihood (98% likely or very likely) of choosing in-home self-collection for future screening and unanimity on overall acceptability (100% acceptable or completely acceptable) of using the device. More affirmative responses to measures on instruction understandability, ease of device use, understanding the device is used for cervical cancer screening, and perceiving self-collection improves screening rates were associated with a higher likelihood to choose self-collection for future screenings and overall acceptability of the device (all p values <0.05). Conclusion: Vaginal specimen self-collection for HPV testing was well-received in the studied population, with high acceptability and likelihood of uptake. Implementation efforts should provide user-friendly instructions and emphasize the benefits of self-collection for cervical cancer screening, particularly among people less likely to engage with clinician-collected speculum-based screening.

Toxins from ingested water can significantly affect overall physical health in children and adults. In the United States, domestic water wells are not commonly tested for any heavy metal contaminants. It is well-known that chronic arsenic ingestion from water is linked to serious health effects. We surveyed patients at our academic institution via emailed questionnaires in 2023 to determine whether those with children living at home reported different patterns of behavior around well water testing as compared to those without. Survey data were collected from 8994 respondents in the U.S. Midwest who reported using residential well water. Results were used to evaluate the influence of children in the home on testing behaviors, and secondarily, whether parental demographics affected testing frequency. Respondents with children at home did not report increased testing frequency compared to those without. In parents who did report testing, having more children, being younger, and living in Wisconsin were associated with an increased frequency. Parental gender, race, and ethnicity did not correlate with testing behaviors. A total of 70% of respondents did not feel concerned about their water safety and 85% were not concerned about arsenic specifically in their water. Increased risk of toxicity to children from arsenic does not appear to influence reported well water testing behavior among parents.

Introduction/Objectives: Despite U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and American Cancer Society endorsement of primary HPV screening, limited published data shows low uptake. Primary Aim: Assess cervical cancer screening rates over time, particularly primary HPV test uptake, among patients in a midwestern practice. Secondary Aim: Evaluate associations between sociodemographics and screening adherence. Methods: Cross-sectional study. Qualifying subjects and type of screening test used were identified by applying ICD-9, ICD-10, lab test, and CPT codes to the Unified Data Platform. Sociodemographics were found through the electronic health record. Results: Primary HPV uptake represented <1% of annual screening from 1/2017 to 1/2022. On 1/1/2022, only 55% of 21 to 29 year old and 63% of 30 to 65 year old were up to date with screening among the studied population. For 21 to 29 year old, compared with White women, Black women were 28% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.72 (0.66-0.79)]. Compared with never-smokers, current smokers were 9% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.91 (0.87-0.96)], past smokers were 14% more likely [RR = 1.14 (1.09-1.2)]. Among 30 to 65 year old, compared with White women, Black women were 14% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.86 (0.81-0.9)]. Compared with never-smokers, current smokers were 21% less likely to be screened [RR = 0.79 (0.77-0.81)], past smokers were 6% less likely [RR = 0.94 (0.92-0.95)]. Jointly considering race, ethnicity, smoking status, Charlson score, and rurality, findings were similar for 21 to 29 year old; Black women were screened less than White women [RR = 0.73 (0.67-0.79)]; current smokers [RR = 0.9 (0.85-0.94)] and past smokers [RR = 1.12 (1.06-1.17)] were screened less than never smokers. For 30 to 65 year old, Black women were screened less than White women [RR = 0.83 (0.79-0.88)]; current smokers [RR = 0.8 (0.78-0.81)] and past smokers [RR = 0.95 (0.93-0.96)] were screened less than never smokers. Conclusions: Screening rates remained below the Healthy People 2030 goal of 79.2% over time, particularly for younger Black women and current smokers, with minimal use of primary HPV screening.

Background: Arsenic is a well-known toxin which may contaminate household water. It is harmful when ingested over prolonged periods of time. As a result, public health experts recommend that water should be screened and treated to prevent arsenic ingestion. In the United States, the responsibility of testing and treatment of private wells falls on homeowners. Despite recommendations for routine screening, this is rarely done. Objectives: To assess the prevalence of well water use in a Midwestern patient population, how patients and clinicians perceive the risks of arsenic in well water, and whether additional resources on well water testing are desired. These findings will be used to influence tools for clinicians regarding symptom and examination findings of chronic arsenic exposure and potentiate the distribution of informational resources on well water testing. Methods: Surveys were sent via email to all actively practicing primary care clinicians at the Mayo Clinic in the United States Midwest, and all active adult patients at the Mayo Clinic in the same region. Our team analyzed survey data to determine whether both patients and clinicians are aware of the health effects of chronic arsenic toxicity from well water, the need for routine well water testing and whether each group wants more information on the associated risks. Results: Both patients and primary care clinicians worry about arsenic exposure. Patients with well water are concerned about their water safety yet feel uninformed about testing options. Clinicians do not know how prevalent well water use is among their patients, feel uninformed about the chronic risks of arsenic exposure and the physical examination associated with it. Both groups unanimously want more information on testing options. Conclusions: Our findings show a significant reliance on well water use in the American Midwest, and unanimous support for the need for further well water testing information and resources for patients and their clinicians.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends that all breastfed infants be supplemented with 400 IU of vitamin D daily, beginning soon after birth. We surveyed all Family Medicine providers at a single, academic medical institution regarding their perceptions and practices of infant vitamin D supplementation. Of 99 surveys solicited, 56 (57%) responded. Respondents were aware of the AAP recommendation with 52 (93%) correctly identifying the AAP’s recommended dose. The self‐reported median (interquartile range) proportion of visits in which the provider recommended supplementation to exclusively or partially breastfed infants were 80% (50 ‐ 97%) and 50% (25 ‐ 80%), respectively. The most common reason (82%) for recommending supplementation was “to follow the AAP recommendations.” Thirty (54%) reported recommending vitamin D supplementation within the first two weeks of life. Of all respondents, 49 (88%) recommend infant vitamin D drops as the route of supplementation. Finally, 49 (88%) respondents would prefer to supplement the mother instead of the infant or offer the parents a choice if this were an adequate and safe option for vitamin D supplementation, and 17 (30%) would prefer monthly to daily supplementation. In conclusion, Family Medicine providers are aware of current AAP recommendations, but vary in their practices; they are open to maternal vitamin D supplementation as an alternative option.

The objective was to determine if a greater proportion of physician full-time equivalent (FTE%) relative to nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NPs/PAs) on care teams was associated with improved individual clinician diabetes quality outcomes. The authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of 420 family medicine clinicians in 110 care teams in a Midwest health system, using administrative data from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. Poisson regression was used to examine the relationship between physician FTE% and the number of patients meeting 5 criteria included in a composite metric for diabetes management (D5). Covariates included panel size, clinician type, sex, years in practice, region, patient satisfaction, care team size, rural location, and panel complexity. Of the 420 clinicians, 167 (40%) were NP/PA staff and 253 (60%) were physicians. D5 criteria were achieved in 37.9% of NP/PA panels compared with 44.5% of physician panels ( P < .001). In adjusted analysis, rate of patients achieving D5 was unrelated to physician FTE% on the care team ( P = .78). Physicians had a 1.082 (95% confidence interval 1.007–1.164) times greater rate of patients with diabetes achieving D5 than NPs/PAs. Clinicians at rural locations had a .904 (.852-.959) times lower rate of achieving D5 than those at urban locations. Physicians had a greater rate of patients achieving D5 compared with NPs/PAs, but physician FTE% on the care team was unrelated to D5 outcomes. This suggests that clinician team composition matters less than team roles and the dynamics of collaborative care between members.

Although U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved and CLIA-waived point-of-care (POC) molecular systems are being implemented in routine clinical practice, instrument reliability, test performance in the hands of end users, and the potential for environmental contamination resulting from use of POC molecular systems have not been extensively evaluated.