Roellinger, Daniel

Introduction/Objectives: House call programs provide care for homebound patients. We conducted a case-control study to compare hospitalization and/or emergency department (ED) use by patients enrolled in a primary care house call program versus ambulatory (community-dwelling) patients. Methods: Program enrollees (cases) were matched by age and self-reported gender to community-dwelling patients (controls). The primary exposure was the combination of hospitalization and/or ED visits for 1 year before the index date (October 1, 2024). We used unadjusted and adjusted conditional logistic regression to determine differences in health care use. Results: We identified 26 cases (median [range] age, 84 [66-98] years; 16 [62%] female) and 130 controls. All cases had 4 or more chronic diseases, as compared with 87 (67%) of controls ( P = .003). A higher proportion of cases than controls had previous hospitalization and/or ED visits (84.6% vs 27.7%; P < .001). After adjusting for the number of chronic illnesses, no differences in previous hospitalization and/or ED use were identified between groups. Conclusions: Cases had more chronic illnesses and more hospitalizations and/or ED visits than community-dwelling controls. The comorbid health burden of participants in the house call program drove greater health care use and justifies a higher level of care for this medically complex patient population.

Video-based care has become a routine part of outpatient care delivery, yet older adults continue to face barriers in accessing and engaging with this modality. This study analyzed the comments provided within 7155 patient experience surveys from adults aged ≥65 years across a large, multi-specialty medical practice to identify challenges experienced with video-based visits. Thematic analysis revealed the highest proportion of positive comments were related to experience with people (71%), while barriers were often related to technical issues with video tools (73%). Most comments related to processes were positive, often highlighting convenience (67%). Using design thinking, we mapped the patient journey and proposed both immediate solutions, such as testing environments and clearer instructions, and long-term innovations like voice-guided support and emotionally intelligent interfaces. Our findings suggest that while video visits offer convenience, they must be redesigned with older adults in mind to ensure equitable, effective, and human-centered care.

Abstract Background Uncertainty exists regarding the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine to prevent postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) following a breakthrough infection. While most studies based on symptom surveys found an association between preinfection vaccination status and PASC symptoms, studies of medically attended PASC are less common and have reported conflicting findings. Methods In this retrospective cohort of patients with an initial SARS-CoV-2 infection who were continually empaneled for primary care in a large US health system, the electronic health record was queried for preinfection vaccination status, demographics, comorbidity index, and diagnosed conditions. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model the outcome of a medically attended PASC diagnosis within 6 months of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Likelihood ratio tests were used to assess the interaction between vaccination status and prevalent variant at the time of infection and between vaccination status and hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results During the observation period, 6.9% of patients experienced medically attended and diagnosed PASC. A diagnosis of PASC was associated with older age, female sex, hospitalization for the initial infection, and an increased severity-weighted comorbidity index and was inversely associated with infection during the Omicron period. No difference in the development of diagnosed PASC was observed between unvaccinated patients and those vaccinated with either 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine or &gt;2 doses. Conclusions We found no association between vaccination status at the time of infection and development of medically diagnosed PASC. Vaccine remains an important measure to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity. Further research is needed to identify effective measures to prevent and treat PASC.

Background: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is an emerging focus in health care, and specialized programs may reduce medical costs, supplement in-office visits, and improve patient satisfaction. In this study, we describe the development, feasibility, and early outcomes of an RPM program for patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Methods: Forty-six patients were offered enrollment at the time of hospital discharge in the cirrhosis RPM program (CiRPM), of which 41 completed at least 30 days of monitoring. Participants were mailed remote monitoring equipment and a tablet to be used for patient-reported outcomes. Alerts were continuously monitored by virtual nursing staff who could perform targeted interventions. A cohort of historical controls (n = 74) was created for comparison using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Results: Patients were enrolled in the program for a mean of 83.9 days, with 28 (68%) completing the full 90-day program. Participants uploaded vital signs and responded to symptom-based questionnaires on 93% of the monitored days. On end-of-program surveys, over 75% of patients expressed satisfaction with the program. Gender, age, and MELD-Na were similar between CiRPM and weighted control groups. The 90-day readmission rate was 34% in CiRPM and 47% in weighted controls. In the CiRPM group, 12% of subjects had 2 or more admissions, compared to 37% in the weighted control group. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the feasibility of a cirrhosis-specific RPM program. Overall, patient satisfaction and utilization of the CiRPM was high. Future studies are needed to confirm the impact of RPM on the reduction of hospital readmissions in decompensated cirrhosis.

Background Digital and mobile (mHealth) solutions are online or application-based services intended to support individuals with health needs. Despite evidence supporting the use of mHealth for patients with chronic pain, and the increasing desire of these types of solutions by both patients and providers, adoption of mHealth solutions remains limited. Implementation mapping can serve as a practical method to facilitate implementation and adoption of mHealth solutions within healthcare settings. Methods Implementation mapping was used to develop implementation strategies based on contextual determinants organized within the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for mHealth eLearning solutions across an integrated, multi-site healthcare system. We describe our experience identifying stakeholders, delineating implementation facilitators and barriers, defining implementation outcomes using RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework, outlining initial implementation strategies, and iterating on implementation strategies. Results A total of 30 implementation strategies were identified and implemented. Over the first year, primary and specialty care providers across all the clinical sites ( n = 70) placed 2559 orders for the mHealth solution. Most patients reported receiving the mHealth eLearning module (74%), and most patients felt that the tool improved their knowledge regarding their condition (82%) and their ability to provide self-care related to the condition (73%). Conclusion Practical applications of implementation science methods can help enable change within healthcare settings. Implementation mapping is an exercise that can engage stakeholders to facilitate the incorporation of new methods of care delivery, including mHealth solutions.

Abstract Background The protective efficacy of prior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with or without vaccination remains unknown. This study sought to understand if 2 or more messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine doses provide additional protection in patients with prior infection, or if infection alone provides comparable protection. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the risk of COVID-19 from 16 December 2020 through 15 March 2022, among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients of all ages with and without prior infection. A Simon-Makuch hazard plot illustrated the incidence of COVID-19 between groups. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the association of demographics, prior infection, and vaccination status with new infection. Results Among 101 941 individuals with at least 1 COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test prior to 15 March 2022, 72 361 (71.0%) received mRNA vaccination and 5957 (5.8%) were previously infected. The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was substantially higher throughout the study period for those previously uninfected and unvaccinated, and lowest for those previously infected and vaccinated. After accounting for age, sex, and the interaction between vaccination and prior infection, a reduction in reinfection risk was noted during the Omicron and pre-Omicron phases of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8%–41%; P = .0065) to 36% (95% CI, 10%–54%; P = .0108), respectively, among previously infected and vaccinated individuals, compared to previously infected subjects without vaccination. Conclusions Vaccination was associated with lower risk of COVID-19, including in those with prior infection. Vaccination should be encouraged for all including those with prior infection, especially as new variants emerge and variant-specific booster vaccines become available.

Background: Concerns for side-effects makes the identification of treatment targets of hypertension in the very elderly challenging. We sought to utilize natural language processing (NLP) to evaluate the prevalence of prespecified side-effects in a cohort of very elderly (≥80 years) patients. Methods and Results: We conducted a two-year, cross-sectional study involving 5169 very elderly patients with and without hypertension seen by primary or specialist providers. Hypertension patients had to have a prior hypertension ICD-9 code in the electronic medical records problem list and ≥2 office visits in 2008 and 2009. We used NLP to analyze extracted free text reports from last clinic visits between 2008 and 2009. Of the 10 prespecified side-effects, hypotension, fatigue, and dizziness were the commonest three conditions and hypotension was significantly higher in the HTN patients. Of the 2835 patients with no prior hypertension history and 2334 hypertension patients identified, the prevalence of each prespecified item in both groups were: acute renal failure (0.3% v 0.6%, p=0.13); syncope (2.8% v 2.2%, p = 0.17), dizziness (3.1% v 4.0%, p=0.09), history of fall (1.0% v 0.9%, p=0.65), fatigue (5.4% v 4.5%, p=0.19), femoral neck fracture (0.18% v 0.04%, p=0.16), palpitations (1.2% v 1.5%, p=0.35), hypotension (4.1% v 6.6%, p<0.001), hyperkalemia (1.1% v 1.7%, p=0.04), hypokalemia (0.4% v 0.9%, p=0.01). At least one presumed side-effect was present in 17.5% of all 5169 patients. Among hypertension patients, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of the side-effects among patients with BP above (578) or below 140/90 (1756) except for acute renal failure (1.21% vs 0.40%, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Analysis of free-text outpatient notes using NLP showed that hypotension and potassium abnormalities were significantly more prevalent in very elderly patients with hypertension compared to similarly aged patients with no hypertension history.

Abstract Background Myocarditis following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) has been increasingly reported. Incidence rates in the general population are lacking, with pericarditis rather than myocarditis diagnostic codes being used to estimate background rates. This comparison is critical for balancing the risk of vaccination with the risk of no vaccination. Methods A retrospective case series was performed using the Mayo Clinic COVID-19 Vaccine Registry. We measured the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for myocarditis temporally related to COVID-19 mRNA vaccination compared with myocarditis in a comparable population from 2016 through 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of the affected patients were collected. A total of 21 individuals were identified, but ultimately 7 patients met the inclusion criteria for vaccine-associated myocarditis. Results The overall IRR of COVID-19–related myocarditis was 4.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63–8.98), which was entirely attributable to an increased IRR among adult males (IRR, 6.69; 95% CI, 2.35–15.52) compared with females (IRR 1.41; 95% CI, .03–8.45). All cases occurred within 2 weeks of a dose of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, with the majority occurring within 3 days (range, 1–13) following the second dose (6 of 7 patients, 86%). Overall, cases were mild, and all patients survived. Conclusions Myocarditis is a rare adverse event associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. It occurs in adult males with significantly higher incidence than in the background population. Recurrence of myocarditis after a subsequent mRNA vaccine dose is not known at this time.

Background: Blood pressure (BP) measurement is a national core quality measure for hypertension care and hypertension control rates remain a major performance measure. It remains unclear whether improving measurement directly results in better control rates in hypertension management. Purpose: To utilize electronic medical records to explore the relationship between measurement of blood pressure and hypertension control rates among 4 eligible primary care providers groups - Primary Care Internal Medicine (PCIM), Family medicine (FM), General Internal Medicine (GIM), Preventive Medicine (PREV) - and 2 eligible specialist groups - Cardiology (CARD), Nephrology (NEPH) at an academic group medical practice. Methods: A two year cross sectional study involving adults seen by eligible primary or specialist providers at 2 or more office visits with a hypertension ICD-9 code in two years with at least one office visit in the measurement year. We measured the proportion of patients who had their BP measured at their last hypertension visit (LHV) in 2009 and 2010. We compared measurement rates with control rates as defined by the proportion of hypertension patients with BP < 140/90 mmHg at their LHV. Results: In 2009, 84.2% of 17989 patients (95% CI 83.6 - 84.7%) had their BP measured at their LHV compared to 85.3% (95% CI 84.8 - 85.8%) of 17992 patients in 2010, an increase of 1.2% (p=0.0026). Measurement rates varied widely across the different provider groups. PCIM, a high performing group, had significant improvement in measurement rates from 2009 to 2010 and demonstrated improvement in control rates. Lower performing groups, Nephrology and GIM, had significant improvement in measurement but did not see a direct translation to improved control rates. There was an associated worsening of the control rates for Preventive medicine along with a decrease in the measurement rates from 2009 to 2010. Conclusion: High BP measurement rates are associated with high hypertension control rates. Prioritizing BP measurement may result in improved intermediate outcomes in hypertension management.

Background: The diagnosis of hypertension requires systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥ 90 mmHg on at least 2 different occasions. Therefore, there is the possibility of patients with elevated BP remaining undiagnosed if not seen by the same provider. Purpose: To utilize electronic medical records (EMR) to identify patients not previously diagnosed with hypertension that have elevated blood pressure meeting criteria for a diagnosis of hypertension using a threshold of SBP ≥ 140mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg (high BP) on 2 or more occasions. Methods: This was a cross sectional design utilizing retrospective multi-year billing and clinical data from a large multi-specialty center in the Midwest. Using electronic records of all outpatient visits in each year from 2009 - 2011, patients with at least 2 visits with SBP ≥ 140mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg (2HBP) in the measurement year were identified. These patients were compared with previously identified cohorts of known hypertension patients (Known HTN) compiled using the EMR problem list. A sensitivity analysis was done using patients with high BP at 2 consecutive visits (2CHBP) and also those with high BP at 3 consecutive visits (3CHBP). We compared proportions of patients with high BP without a prior diagnosis of hypertension (UDHTN). Results: The proportion of patients with SBP ≥ 140mmHg or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg without a prior diagnosis of hypertension (UDHTN) when compared to the cohort of known patients with a diagnosis of hypertension (Known HTN) was 25% in 2009, 26% in 2010, and 28% in 2011 in the 2CHBP cohort compared to 27% in 2009, 28% in 2010, and 30% in 2011 in the 2HBP cohort and 18% in 2009, 19% in 2010 and 23% in 2011 in the 3CHBP cohort. Conclusion: About a quarter of patients meeting current thresholds on multiple and consecutive visits did not have a known diagnosis of hypertension. The use of EMR can identify these patients for commencement of appropriate management. Table 1