Search

Peer mentorship shows promise as a strategy to support veteran mental health. A community-academic partnership involving a veteran-led nonprofit organization and institutions of higher education evaluated a collaboratively developed peer mentor intervention. We assessed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), postdeployment experiences, social functioning, and psychological strengths at baseline, midpoint, and 12-week discharge using the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), Deployment Risk and Resilience Inventory-2, Social Adaptation Self-evaluation Scale, and Values in Action Survey. Brief weekly check-in surveys reinforced mentor contact and assessed retention. The sample included 307 veterans who were served by 17 veteran peer mentors. Mixed-effects linear models found a modest effect for PTSD symptom change, with a mean PCL-5 score reduction of 4.04 points, 95% CI [-6.44, -1.64], d = 0.44. More symptomatic veterans showed a larger effect, with average reductions of 9.03 points, 95% CI [-12.11, -5.95], d = 0.77. There were no significant findings for other outcome variables. Compared to younger veterans, those aged 32-57 years were less likely to drop out by 6 weeks, aORs = 0.32-0.26. Week-by-week hazard of drop-out was lower with mentors ≥ 35 years old, aHR = 0.62, 95% CI [0.37, 1.05]. Unadjusted survival differed by mentor military branch, p = .028, but the small mentor sample reduced interpretability. Like many community research efforts, this study lacked a control group, limiting the inferences that can be drawn. Continued study of veteran peer mentorship is important as this modality is often viewed as more tolerable than therapy., (© 2024 International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.)

Background: Patient engagement in research agenda setting is increasingly being seen as a strategy to improve the responsiveness of healthcare to patient priorities. Implementation of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer is suboptimal, suggesting that research is needed., Objectives: This study aimed to describe an approach by which a Veteran patient group worked with other stakeholders to develop a research agenda for LDCT screening and to describe the research questions that they prioritized., Methods: We worked with Veterans organizations to identify 12 Veterans or family members at risk for or having experience with lung cancer to form a Patient Advisory Council (PAC). The PAC met repeatedly from June 2018 to December 2020, both independently and jointly, with stakeholders representing clinicians, health administrators and researchers to identify relevant research topics. The PAC prioritized these topics and then identified questions within these areas where research was needed using an iterative process. Finally, they ranked the importance of obtaining answers to these questions., Results: PAC members valued the co-learning generated by interactions with stakeholders, but emphasized the importance of facilitation to avoid stakeholders dominating the discussion. The PAC prioritized three broad research areas-(1) the impact of insurance on uptake of LDCT; (2) how best to inform Veterans about LDCT; and (3) follow-up and impact of screening results. Using these areas as guides, PAC members identified 20 specific questions, ranking as most important (1) innovative outreach methods, (2) the impact of screening on psychological health, and (3) the impact of outsourcing scans from VA to non-VA providers on completion of recommended follow-up of screening results. The latter two were not identified as high priority by the stakeholder group., Conclusions: We present an approach that facilitates co-learning between Veteran patients and providers, researchers and health system administrators to increase patient confidence in their ability to contribute important information to a research agenda. The research questions prioritized by the Veterans who participated in this project illustrate that for this new screening technology, patients are concerned about the practical details of implementation (e.g., follow-up) and the technology's impact on quality of life., Patient or Public Contribution: Veterans and Veteran advocates contributed to our research team throughout the entire research process, including conceiving and co-authoring this manuscript., (© 2021 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Emergency department (ED) superutilizers (patients with five or more visits/year) comprise only 5% of the patients seen yet comprise 25% of total ED visits. Although the reasons for this are multifactorial, the cost to the patient and the community is exceedingly high. The cost is not just monetary; care of these patients is inappropriately fragmented and their presence in the ED may contribute to overcrowding affecting the community's emergency readiness. Previous studies using staff trained to help patients navigate their care options have had conflicting results., Objectives: The objective was to determine whether a trained patient navigator (PN) can reduce ED use and costs in superutilizers over a 1-year period., Methods: Superutilizers were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Patients were randomized into the treatment arm and met with a PN who reviewed their diagnosis and associated care plan and identified proper primary care services and community resources for follow-up. The remaining control group was provided standard care. Both groups were given a follow-up call and survey by the PN within 7 days of their visit who assessed primary care follow-up and patient satisfaction using a 4-point Likert scale. After 12 months, the patients' return ED visits and ED costs were compared to the year prior and primary care compliance and satisfaction were measured using Student's t-tests with Bonferroni correction or Mann-Whitney U-tests., Results: A total of 282 patients were enrolled (148 in navigation treatment group, 134 controls). Patients were similarly matched in age, race, sex, insurance, and chief complaints. Overall ED visits decreased during the 12-month study period, compared to the 12 months prior to enrollment (2,249 visits prior to 2,050 visits during study period, -8.8%). There was a greater decrease in ED visits from the preenrollment year to postenrollment year in the treatment group (1,148 visits to 996 visits, -13.2%) compared to the control group (1,101 visits to 1,054 visits, -4.3%; p < 0.05). Overall health care costs (ED and hospital) for all 282 patients decreased in the year after compared to the 12 months prior to enrollment ($3.9M to $3.1M) with a greater decrease in the navigation treatment group (-26.6%) compared to the control group (-17.5%). Patient surveys found no difference in patient satisfaction in the pre- and postenrollment periods but there was an increase in primary care physician (PCP) use over the 12-month follow-up period in the treatment group (6.42 visits/patient) compared to the control group (4.07 visits/patient; p < 0.05)., Conclusion: Our data showed that the overall number of return ED visits and costs did decrease for both groups, potentially inferring a placebo effect for the use of a PN; however, the decrease in ED visits and costs were greater in the treatment group. One-year follow-up noted an increase in PCP visits in the navigation group. Use of a PN may be cost-effective., (© 2017 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Residency reform in the form of work hour restrictions has forced academic medical centers to develop alternate models of care to provide inpatient care. One such model is the use of physician assistants (PAs) with hospitalists. However, these models of care have not been widely evaluated., Objective: To compare the outcomes of inpatient care provided by a hospitalist-PA (H-PA) model with the traditional resident based model., Design, Setting and Patients: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 9681 general medical (GM) hospitalizations between January 2005 and December 2006 using a hospital administrative database. We used multivariable mixed models to adjust for a wide variety of potential confounders and account for multiple patient visits to the hospital to compare the outcomes of 2171 hospitalizations to H-PA teams with those of 7510 hospitalizations to resident teams (RES)., Measurements: Length of stay (LOS), charges, readmission within 7, 14, and 30 days and inpatient mortality., Results: Inpatient care provided by H-PA teams was associated with a 6.73% longer LOS (P = 0.005) but charges, risk of readmission at 7, 14, and 30 days and inpatient mortality were similar to resident-based teams. The increase in LOS was dependent on the time of admission of the patients., Conclusions: H-PA team-based GM inpatient care was associated with a higher LOS but similar charges, readmission rates, and inpatient mortality to traditional resident-based teams, a finding that persisted in sensitivity analyses., (2011 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

The details of 16 patients with extramedullary plasmacytoma are presented. All but one presented with localized disease, and all were treated successfully by radiotherapy. Only one patient developed local recurrence and only one has developed disseminated disease. Radiotherapy is recommended as the primary treatment of choice for these localized radiosensitive tumors. It is suggested that the good prognosis of plasmacytomas of the head and neck, in contrast to plasmacytomas arising at other sites, is related to the observation that a high proportion of these tumors are localized at the time of diagnosis and that very large primary tumors are uncommon.