Search

PURPOSE Adolescents and young adults (AYAs; age 18-39 years) with cancer report needing support with health insurance. We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a virtual health insurance navigation intervention (HIAYA CHAT) to improve health insurance literacy (HIL), awareness of Affordable Care Act (ACA) protections, financial toxicity, and stress. MATERIALS AND METHODS HIAYA CHAT is a four-session navigator delivered program; it includes psychoeducation on insurance, navigating one’s plan, insurance-related laws, and managing costs. Participants were eligible if they could access an internetcapable device, were <1 year from diagnosis, and received treatment from University of Utah Healthcare or Intermountain Health systems. We assessed the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of HIAYA CHAT compared with usual navigation care, including HIL (nine items), insurance knowledge (13 items), ACA protections (eight items), COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST; 11 items), and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; four items), using t tests and Cohen’s d. RESULTS From November 2020 to December 2021, N 5 86 AYAs enrolled (44.6% participation) and 89.3% completed the 5-month follow-up survey; 68.6% were female, 72.1% were White, 23.3% were Hispanic, 65.1% were age 26-39 years, and 87.2% were privately insured. Of intervention participants (n 5 45), 67.4% completed all four sessions; among an exit interview subset (n 5 10), all endorsed the program (100%). At follow-up, compared with usual navigation care, intervention participants had greater improvements in HIL, insurance and ACA protections knowledge, and PSS; effect sizes ranged from moderate to large (0.42-0.77). COST did not differ. CONCLUSION The results support the feasibility and acceptability of HIAYA CHAT with related improvements in HIL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to clarify the influence of predicting a correct diagnosis from the history on physical examination by comparing the diagnostic accuracy of auscultation with and without clinical information. Methods: The participants were 102 medical students from the 2013 clinical clerkship course. Auscultation was performed with a cardiology patient simulator. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups. Each group listened to a different simulated heart murmur and then made a diagnosis without clinical information. Next, a history suggesting a different murmur was provided to each group and they predicted the diagnosis. Finally, the students listened to a murmur corresponding to the history provided and again made a diagnosis. Correct and incorrect diagnosis rates of auscultation were compared between students with and without clinical information, between students predicting a correct or incorrect diagnosis from the history (correct and incorrect prediction groups, respectively), and between students without clinical information and those making an incorrect prediction. Results: For auscultation with or without clinical information, the correct diagnosis rate was 62.7% (128/204 participants) versus 54.4% (111/204 participants), showing no significant difference (P=0.09). After receiving clinical information, a correct diagnosis was made by 102/117 students (87.2%) in the correct prediction group versus 26/87 students (29.9%) in the incorrect prediction group, showing a significant difference (P=0.006). The correct diagnosis rate was also significantly lower in the incorrect prediction group than when the students performed auscultation without clinical information (54.4% versus 29.9%, P<0.001). Conclusion: Obtaining a history alone does not improve the diagnostic accuracy of physical examination. However, accurately predicting the diagnosis from the history is associated with higher diagnostic accuracy of physical examination, while incorrect prediction is associated with lower diagnostic accuracy of examination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There have been some studies of common primary care diseases in Japan, but no reports on which diseases it is difficult for general physicians to diagnose in daily practice. In this study, we identified diseases that provided a diagnostic challenge for Japanese general physicians in daily practice. Methods The subjects were new undiagnosed patients referred to the General Outpatient Department of Chiba University Hospital during the one-year period from January 2008. We performed a retrospective chart review to identify the referring doctor, patient demographics, the duration of symptoms, the final diagnosis, and the outcome. Final diagnoses were classified according to the International Classification of Primary Care Second Edition (ICPC-2). In addition, the differences between referrals from general physicians and those from other physicians were assessed. Fisher's exact test and the Bonferroni-Holm correction were used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 169 patients were referred by general physicians and 239 patients were referred by other physicians. The most common ICPC-2 diagnosis was "General & Unspecified" conditions (35 patients, 20.7%), followed by "Psychological" conditions (31 patients, 18.3%) and "Musculoskeletal" conditions (21 patients, 12.4%). No significant differences of the ICPC-2 category for the final diagnosis and each diagnosis were found between patients referred by general physicians and those referred by other physicians. The hospitalization rate was lower for patients referred by general physicians than for patients referred by other physicians (4 patients, 2.4% vs. 24 patients, 10.0%) (P = 0.002). Conclusions Japanese general physicians found difficulty in diagnosing "Psychological" conditions, "Musculoskeletal" conditions, variations within the normal range, and viral infections that required diagnosis by exclusion. Because most of the patients referred by general physicians had mild conditions, further education at outpatient departments and clinics is required to improve diagnostic performance. Additionally, it is important to increase the gatekeeper role of general physicians and further development of the medical system by the government to distinguish the functions of clinics and hospitals is expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of diseases predicted from patient responses to a simple questionnaire completed prior to examination by doctors with different levels of ambulatory training in general medicine. Participants and methods: Before patient examination, five trained physicians, four short-term-trained residents, and four untrained residents examined patient responses to a simple questionnaire and then indicated, in rank order according to their subjective confidence level, the diseases they predicted. Final diagnosis was subsequently determined from hospital records by mentor physicians 3 months after the first patient visit. Predicted diseases and final diagnoses were codified using the International Classification of Diseases version 10. A "correct" diagnosis was one where the predicted disease matched the final diagnosis code. Results: A total of 148 patient questionnaires were evaluated. The Herfindahl index was 0.024, indicating a high degree of diversity in final diagnoses. The proportion of correct diagnoses was high in the trained group (96 of 148, 65%; residual analysis, 4.4) and low in the untrained group (56 of 148, 38%; residual analysis, -3.6) (?2=22.27, P,0.001). In cases of correct diagnosis, the cumulative number of correct diagnoses showed almost no improvement, even when doctors in the three groups predicted $4 diseases. Conclusion: Doctors who completed ambulatory training in general medicine while treating a diverse range of diseases accurately predicted diagnosis in 65% of cases from limited written information provided by a simple patient questionnaire, which proved useful for diagnosis. The study also suggests that up to three differential diagnoses are appropriate for diagnostic prediction, while $4 differential diagnoses barely improved the diagnostic accuracy, regardless of doctors' competence in general medicine. If doctors can become able to predict the final diagnosis from limited information, the correct diagnostic outcome may improve and save further consultation hours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The case history is an important part of diagnostic reasoning. The patient management problem method has been used in various studies, but may not reflect the actual reasoning process because a list of choices is given to the subjects in advance. This study investigated the contribution of the history to making the correct diagnosis by using clinical case simulation, in which students obtained clinical information by themselves. Methods: A prospective study was conducted. Ninety-four fifth-year medical students from Chiba University who underwent supervised clinical clerkships in 2009 were surveyed. Each student randomly selected 1 of 4 test cases and attempted to make a diagnosis through medical inter-view, physical examination, and laboratory tests, while the teacher acted as a patient. The student ranked the disease(s) diagnosed at each stage of the process. Diagnostic accuracy rates were compared using analysis of the X2-test. Results: Sixty students (63.8%) made a correct diagnosis, which was based on the history in 43 students (71.7%), physical findings in 11 students (18.3%), and laboratory data in 6 students (10.0%). Compared with students who considered the correct diagnosis in their differential diagnosis after taking a history, students who failed to do so were 5.0 times (95%CI = 2.5-9.8) more likely to make a final misdiagnosis (X2(1) = 30.73; p<0.001). Conclusions: History taking is especially important for making a correct diagnosis when students perform clinical case simulation. To improve the diagnostic reasoning skills, medical students should be trained in methods for inferring the correct diagnosis from the case history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]