Search

Background: Home‐based primary care promotes aging in place but is not immediately responsive to urgent needs. Community paramedicine leverages emergency medical services clinicians to expedite in‐home care, though limited evidence supports this model. We evaluated the primary care and acute care use of older adults evaluated urgently by a community paramedic with telemedicine physician compared to a physician home visit model. Methods: This prospective cohort study enrolled older adults in home‐based primary care who requested an urgent evaluation. We allocated participants to the physician home visit model or physician home visit plus community paramedic model by ZIP code. We observed primary care and acute care use for 6 months following enrollment. The primary outcome was the median number of primary care and acute care visits per participant. Secondary outcomes included 30‐day readmission rates, median wait times, and physician productivity. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, comparison of means and proportions, and negative binomial regression modeling reported as incidence rate ratios (IRR). Results: We screened 255 participants, determined 203 eligible, allocated 199, and completed observation for 167 (84 community paramedicine, 83 physician home visit). Participants were mostly female, age 76–86 years, with 3–5 comorbidities, living in a home/apartment. Community paramedic participants had 29% more primary care visits (IRR 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–1.57) and shorter wait times for urgent evaluations (1 vs. 5 days, p < 0.001) without increasing acute care use (IRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48–1.18) or 30‐day readmissions (IRR 1.32, 95% CI 0.49–3.55). Physician productivity increased 81% (40 vs. 22 visits/week, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Older adults evaluated by a community paramedic for urgent needs were seen sooner, used acute care similarly to patients evaluated by a physician home visit, and nearly doubled physician efficiency. This suggests that older adults may benefit from combining emergency medical services and primary care resources for urgent evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe differences in clinical and demographic characteristics between patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) and determine the effect of migraine subtype on patient‐reported outcome measures (PROM). Background: Prior studies have characterized migraine in the general population. While this provides a basis for our understanding of migraine, we have less insight into the characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes of migraine patients who present to subspecialty headache clinics. These patients represent a subset of the population that bears the greatest burden of migraine disability and are more representative of migraine patients who seek medical care. Valuable insights can be gained from a better understanding of CM and EM in this population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients with CM or EM seen in the Cleveland Clinic Headache Center between January 2012 and June 2017. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and patient‐reported outcome measures (3‐Level European Quality of Life 5‐Dimension [EQ‐5D‐3L], Headache Impact Test‐6 [HIT‐6], Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 [PHQ‐9]) were compared between groups. Results: Eleven thousand thirty‐seven patients who had 29,032 visits were included. More CM patients reported being on disability 517/3652 (14.2%) than EM patients 249/4881 (5.1%) and had significantly worse mean HIT‐6 (67.3 ± 7.4 vs. 63.1 ± 7.4, p < 0.001) and median [interquartile range] EQ‐5D‐3L (0.77 [0.44–0.82] vs. 0.83 [0.77–1.00], p < 0.001), and PHQ‐9 (10 [6–16] vs. 5 [2–10], p < 0.001). Conclusions: There are multiple differences in demographic characteristics and comorbid conditions between patients with CM and EM. After adjustment for these factors, CM patients had higher PHQ‐9 scores, lower quality of life scores, greater disability, and greater work restrictions/unemployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Debilitating symptoms of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI) often lead to long-term effects on health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL). In ECOSPOR III, SER-109, an investigational oral microbiome therapeutic, was superior to placebo in reducing rCDI. We investigated the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of a 32-item, CDI-specific questionnaire—the Clostridium difficile Quality of Life Survey (Cdiff32)—across mental, physical, and social domains in patients with rCDI. Methods In this post hoc analysis of a phase 3 clinical trial, 182 outpatients with rCDI completed Cdiff32 and EQ-5D at baseline and at 1 and 8 weeks. Cdiff32 was evaluated for item performance, internal reliability, and convergent validity. To assess known-groups validity, Cdiff32 scores were compared by disease recurrence status at week 1; internal responsiveness was evaluated in the nonrecurrent disease group by 8 weeks by means of paired t test. Results All 182 patients (mean age [standard deviation], 65.5 [16.5] years; 59.9% female) completed baseline Cdiff32. Confirmatory factor analysis identified 3 domains (physical, mental, and social relationships) with good item fit. High internal reliability was demonstrated (Cronbach α = 0.94 with all subscales >0.80). Convergent validity was evidenced by significant correlations between Cdiff32 subscales and EQ-5D (r = 0.29–0.37; P <.001). Cdiff32 differentiated patients by disease recurrence status at week 1 (effect sizes, 0.38–0.42; P <.05 overall), with significant improvement from baseline through week 8 in patients with nonrecurrent disease at week 1 (effect sizes, 0.75–1.02; P <.001 overall). Conclusions Cdiff32 is a valid, reliable, and responsive disease-specific HRQOL questionnaire that is fit for purpose for interventional treatment trials. The significant improvement in patients with nonrecurrent disease by 8 weeks demonstrates the negative impact of rCDI on HRQOL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]