Search

Background Since its emergence in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions, such as coughing, and care activities, such as aerosol-generating procedures, likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of the personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators. The purpose of the current study was to develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists, with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Results The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 8 recommendations, including 2 updated recommendations and 1 new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included. Conclusions Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for 8 specific questions on the use of PPE by HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient safety is a priority in health care systems. Nurses' safety competence along with environmental and personal factors plays a role in patient safety. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships among safety competency, structural empowerment, systems thinking, level of education, and certification. Methods: A cross-sectional exploratory design was used to collect data from nurses (n = 163) practicing in a large Midwestern hospital system. Results: There were significant positive correlations between safety competency and (a) structural empowerment, (b) systems thinking, and (c) certification. Systems thinking explained 12.9% of the variance in the knowledge component of safety competency and 6.8% of the variance in the skill component of safety competency. Certification explained 2.4% of the variance in the skill component of safety competency. Conclusions: Understanding factors that affect safety competency supports the development of effective interventions that may improve safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While we have the tools to achieve this goal, the persistent barriers to healthcare services experienced by too many individuals will need to be addressed to make significant progress and improve the health and quality of life of all people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The necessary structural changes require actions by federal, state, and local policymakers and range from ensuring universal access to healthcare services to optimizing care delivery to ensuring a robust and diverse infectious diseases and HIV workforce. In this article, we outlines 10 key principles for policy reforms that, if advanced, would make ending the HIV epidemic in the United States possible and could have much more far-reaching effects in improving the health of our nation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have revolutionized chronic hepatitis C (HCV) treatment, but real-world effectiveness among vulnerable populations, including uninsured patients, is lacking. This study was conducted to characterize the effectiveness of DAAs in a socioeconomically disadvantaged and underinsured patient cohort.Methods: This retrospective observational study included all patients undergoing HCV treatment with DAA-based therapy between April 2014 and June 2016 at a large urban safety-net health system (Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, TX, USA). The primary outcome was sustained virologic response (SVR), with secondary outcomes including treatment discontinuation, treatment relapse, and loss to follow-up.Results: DAA-based therapy was initiated in 512 patients. The cohort was socioeconomically disadvantaged (56% uninsured and 13% Medicaid), with high historic rates of alcohol (41%) and substance (50%) use, and mental health disorders (38%). SVR was achieved in 90% of patients (n = 459); 26 patients (5%) were lost to follow-up. SVR was significantly lower in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (82% SVR; OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.85) but did not differ by insurance status (P = 0.98) or alcohol/substance use (P = 0.34). Reasons for treatment failure included loss to follow-up (n = 26, 5%), viral relapse (n = 16, 3%), non-treatment-related death (n = 7, 1%), and treatment discontinuation (n = 4, 1%). Of patients with viral relapse, 6 reported non-compliance and have not been retreated, 5 have been retreated and achieved SVR, 4 have undergone resistance testing but not yet initiated retreatment, and 1 was lost to follow-up.Conclusions: Effective outcomes with DAA-based therapy can be achieved in difficult-to-treat underinsured populations followed in resource-constrained safety-net health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the evidence supporting the value of well-coordinated healthcare teams continues to grow, so to do the calls from medical educators and policy makers for the development of meaningful interprofessional educational experiences for health professions students. The student-run clinic has emerged as a unique venue for such experiential interprofessional learning experiences, with over 100 such clinics now in operation across North America. As the number and variety of these clinics rises, it has become increasingly important to understand the quality of care which they deliver. Here, patient satisfaction data from an interprofessional student-run free clinic are described, and these results are quantitatively compared to similar data obtained from a non-interprofessional, non-student-run clinic in a post-experience only, non-equivalent groups design. Student-run free clinic patients reported high levels of satisfaction with the patient care team and the facility quality, and lower levels of satisfaction with waiting times. When compared to the non-student-run clinic, there was no significant difference in the high levels of patient satisfaction with the patient care teams between the clinics. Student-run free clinic patients did, however, report significantly lower levels of satisfaction with the accessibility of care and with the perceived privacy of protected health information. Overall, this report provides evidence that an interprofessional student-run free clinic is capable of performing at the level of an experienced free clinic across many domains of patient satisfaction, while also identifying notable areas for improvement within the domains of clinic accessibility and the perception of the privacy of protected health information. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background. The common occurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients who carry the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) demands that both viruses be recognized, evaluated, and treated when appropriate. Methods. We identified 357 HIV- and hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients who underwent testing from 1999 to 2003; 155 patients who were new to our clinic and who initiated therapy for HIV and HBV coinfection were considered for inclusion in the study. The frequency of HIV testing (to determine HIV load and CD4+ cell count) performed during the first year of therapy was compared with the frequency of HBV measurements (to determine hepatitis B e antigen, antibody to hepatitis B e antigen, and HBV load), abdominal ultrasound examination, and measurement of levels of α-fetoprotein in serum. Results. HBV load data were obtained for only 16% of patients before initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART), whereas HIV load was determined for 99% of patients before initiation of ART. The total number of HIV load measurements obtained during the first year after ART initiation was 497 (median number of HIV load measurements per patient, 3.0), compared with 85 measurements of HBV load (median number of HBV load measurements per patient, <1; P<.001). The percentage of patients who received any level of HBV monitoring (i.e., tests to determine hepatitis B e antigen, antibody to hepatitis B e antigen, and HBV load) after ART initiation increased from 7% in 1999 to 52% in 2001 (P<.001), whereas the percentage of patients who underwent HIV load testing remained at 80%-90% during the same period. Conclusions. Health care providers treating patients with HIV infection during the period 1999-2003 infrequently monitored HBV response in coinfected patients, but they systematically monitored HIV response after ART initiation. Improved physician adherence to guidelines that better delineate HBV treatment and monitoring for patients with HIV-HBV coinfection is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment can significantly reduce the risk of liver-related mortality; however, many patients remain unaware of their infection in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of inreach, with and without mailed outreach, to increase HCV screening and follow-up in a large, difficult-to-reach patient population. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial from August 2018 to May 2019 in a large safety-net health system. Patients born between 1945 and 1965 were randomly assigned (1:1) to inreach with an electronic health record reminder to providers (n = 6,195) or inreach plus mailed HCV screening outreach (n = 6,191) to complete HCV antibody screening. Outreach also included processes to promote HCV RNA testing among those with a positive HCV antibody and linkage to care among those with positive HCV RNA. The primary outcome was completion of HCV antibody testing within 3 months of randomization (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03706742). RESULTS: We included 12,386 eligible patients (median age 60 years; 46.5% Hispanic, 33.0% Black, and 16.0% White). In intent-to-treat analyses, HCV screening completion was significantly higher among inreach-plus-outreach patients than inreach-alone patients at 3 months (14.6% vs 7.4%, P < 0.001) and 6 months (17.4% vs 9.8%, P < 0.001) after randomization. Among those who completed HCV screening within 6 months, a higher proportion of inreach-plus-outreach patients with positive antibody results completed RNA testing within 3 months than inreach-alone patients (81.1% vs 57.1%, respectively, P = 0.02); however, linkage to care within 3 months of HCV infection confirmation did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (48.1% vs 75.0%, respectively, P = 0.24). DISCUSSION: Among difficult-to-reach patients, a combination of inreach and mailed outreach significantly increased HCV screening compared with inreach alone. However, HCV screening completion in both arms remained low, highlighting a need for more intensive interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People living with HIV who report substance use (PLWH-SU) face many barriers to care, resulting in an increased risk for poor health outcomes and the potential for ongoing disease transmission. This study evaluates the mechanisms by which Patient Navigation (PN) and Contingency Management (CM) interventions may work to address barriers to care and improve HIV outcomes in this population.Methods: Mediation analysis was conducted using data from a randomized, multi-site trial testing PN interventions to improve HIV care outcomes among 801 hospitalized PLHW-SU. Direct and indirect effects of PN and PN + CM were evaluated through five potential mediators-psychosocial conditions, healthcare avoidance, financial hardship, system barriers, and self-efficacy for HIV treatment adherence-on engagement in HIV care and viral suppression.Results: The PN + CM intervention had an indirect effect on improving engagement in HIV care at 6 months by increasing self-efficacy for HIV treatment adherence (β = 0.042, 95% CI = 0.008, 0.086). PN + CM also led to increases in viral suppression at 6 months (β = 0.090, 95% CI = 0.023, 0.168) and 12 months (β = 0.069, 95% CI = 0.009, 0.129) via increases in self-efficacy, although the direct effects were not significant. No mediating effects were observed for PN alone.Conclusion: PN + CM interventions for PLWH-SU can increase an individual's self-efficacy for HIV treatment adherence, which in turn improves engagement in care at 6 months and may contribute to viral suppression over 12 months. Building self-efficacy may be a key factor in the success of such interventions and should be considered as a primary goal of PN + CM in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]