Search

OBJECTIVES: To complete a scoping review of US health insurers' use of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. METHODS: A literature search was constructed for articles that contained an insurer-related term and an HRQOL-related term between 1999 and 2019 using the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EconLit, and Business Source Complete databases. RESULTS: The search identified 14,253 unduplicated records, of which 2340 passed abstract screening and 350 were included in the review. The populations addressed in these studies included both populations with specific health conditions (eg, diabetes) and an entire member population. The most common purpose of the article was to evaluate a policy or program (n = 255; 72.9%); the range of interventions evaluated included federal policy, subgroup management strategies, and identification of individual patients. The most common insurance mechanism was Medicare (n = 205; 58.6%). The most common source of data was collected specifically for a research project (n = 172; 49.1%), and the least common source of data was collected by providers at the point of care (n = 34; 9.7%). The most commonly addressed age group was 65 years and older (n = 262; 74.9%), and the least commonly addressed was younger than 18 years (n = 36; 10.3%). The most commonly used PROMs were single-item self-rated health (n = 138; 47.1%) and activities of daily living (n = 88; 30.0%), with validated depression questionnaires (n = 56; 19.1%) being the most common disease-focused questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: This review found a wide variety of articles across insurance providers, health conditions, and uses of PROMs. There is a noted paucity of data in pediatric populations and little information about the use of data collected within health care settings that is transmitted to health insurers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The local treatment of extremity sarcomas usually is predicated on a decision between limb salvage and amputation. The manner in which surgical options are presented in the context of shared decision-making may influence this decision. In a population of "simulated" patients-survey respondents presented with a mock clinical vignette and then asked to choose between treatments-we assessed cognitive bias by deliberate alteration of the subjective presentation of the same objective information.Questions/purposes: (1) Will the manner in which information is presented to a simulated patient, in the setting of treatment for a bone sarcoma, bias their decision regarding pursuing amputation versus limb salvage? (2) At the time of decision-making, will a simulated patient's personal background, demographics, or mood affect their ultimate decision?Methods: Survey respondents (Amazon MTurk platform) were presented with mock clinical vignettes simulating a sarcoma diagnosis and were asked to choose between amputation and limb salvage. Specific iterations were designed to assess several described types of cognitive bias. These scenarios were distributed, using anonymous online surveys, to potential participants aged 18 years or older. Recruitment was geographically restricted to individuals in the United States. Overall, 404 respondents completed the survey. The average age of respondents was 33 years (SD 1.2 years), 60% were male and 40% were female. In all, 12% of respondents worked in healthcare. Each respondent also completed questions regarding his or her demographics and his or her current mood. Associations between the type of bias presented and the respondent's choice of limb salvage versus amputation were examined. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare means. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05.Results: When amputation was presented as an option to mitigate functional loss (framing bias), more patients chose it than when limb salvage was presented as means for increased functional gains (23% [23 of 100] versus 10% [12 of 118], odds ratio [OR], 2.26; p = 0.010). Older simulated patients were more likely to choose limb salvage when exposed to framing bias versus younger patients (mean age 33 years versus 30 years, p = 0.02). Respondents who were employed in healthcare more commonly chose amputation versus limb salvage when exposed to framing bias (24% [eight of 35] versus 9% [17 of 183]; OR, 2.46; p = 0.02). Those who chose amputation were more likely to score higher on scales that measured depression or negative affect.Conclusions: Shared decision-making in orthopaedic oncology represents a unique circumstance in which several variables may influence a patient's decision between limb salvage and amputation. Invoking cognitive bias in simulated patients appeared to affect treatment decisions. We cannot be sure that these findings translate to the experience of actual sarcoma patients; however, we can conclude that important treatment decisions may be affected by cognitive bias and that patient characteristics (in this study, age, healthcare profession, and mood) may be associated with an individual's susceptibility to cognitive bias. We hope these observations will assist providers in the thoughtful delivery of highly charged information to patients facing difficult decisions, and promote further study of this important concept.Level Of Evidence: Level III, economic and decision analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Many steps in getting a mammogram may produce a less than satisfactory experience. Dissatisfaction with mammography could lead to lower routine mammography adherence. The purpose of this study was to use qualitative research methods to assess patient satisfaction with all stages of the mammography experience. Methods: Eleven locus groups were conducted with 103 women in rural (N=6) and urban (N=5) communities. Separate groups were held for African-American, non-Hispanic White, and Hispanic women. Participants spoke English, were 40 years of age or older, had a mammogram within the past three years, and had no history of cancer. Transcripts were analyzed for major themes related to mammography satisfaction. Results: Participants described 39 variables that affected their mammography satisfaction that may be categorized into seven primary themes: (1) appointment scheduling, (2) facility. (3) general exam, (4) embarrassment, (5) exam discomfort/pain, (6) treatment by the technologist, and (7) reporting results. The most common issues voiced were convenience and ease of scheduling appointments and follow-up tests, waiting room time and comfort, treatment by technologists, pain, and results reporting procedure and timing. Conclusions: Satisfaction was not limited to the mammography procedure itself, but encompassed the entire experience from appointment scheduling to receipt of results and arranging follow-up. These findings indicated a variety of areas that mammography facilities might address to enhance mammography satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Approximately 5% of cancer patients in the United States presented with metastatic bone disease (MBD) at diagnosis. Current study explores the disparities in survival for patients with MBD., Methods: Patients with the diagnosis of MBD at presentation for the five most common primary anatomical sites were extracted from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Census tract-level dataset (2010-2016). Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazard models were used to evaluate survival, and prognostic factors for each cohort. Prognostic significance of socioeconomic status (SES) and insurance status were ascertained., Results: The five most common anatomical-sites with MBD at presentation included "lung" (n = 59 739), "prostate" (n = 19 732), "breast" (n = 16 244), "renal and urothelium" (n = 7718) and "colon" (n= 3068). Lower SES was an independent risk factor for worse disease-specific survival (DSS) for patients with MBD originating from lung, prostate, breast and colon. Lack of insurance was an independent risk factor for worse DSS for MBD patients with primary tumors in lung and breast., Conclusions: MBD patients from the five most common primary sites demonstrated SES and insurance-related disparities in disease-specific survival. This is the first and largest study to explore SES and insurance-related disparities among patients specifically afflicted with MBD. Our findings highlight vulnerability of patients with MBD across multiple primary sites to financial toxicity., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: We have analyzed sex, race/ethnicity or socioeconomic disparities in the incidence of metastatic bone disease (MBD)., Methods: Patients with the diagnosis of MBD at presentation for five most common primary anatomical sites was extracted from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Census tract-level dataset. Mean incidence of MBD for different sex, racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups were compared., Results: The five most common anatomical sites with MBD at presentation include "lung: (n = 59 739), "prostate" (n = 19 732), "breast" (n = 16 244), "renal" (n = 7718) and "colon" (n = 3068). There was an increase in incidence of MBD among cancers originating from prostate (annual percentage change [APC] 4.94), renal (APC 2.55), and colon (APC 3.21) (p < 0.05 for all). Non-Hispanic Blacks had higher incidence of MBD for prostate and breast primary sites (p < 0.001). Non-Hispanic American Indian Alaskan Native had higher incidence of MBD for cancers originating from renal (p < 0.001) and colon (p = 0.049). A higher incidence of MBD was seen in lower socioeconomic status (SES) groups for the selected sites (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: These findings suggest that there are multiple sex-related, racial/ethnic and SES disparities in the incidence of MBD from the 5 most common primary sites. Higher incidence seen among lower SES suggests delay in diagnosis and limited access to screening modalities., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Reducing hospital readmissions has become a priority in the development of policies aimed at patient safety and cost reduction. Evaluating the incidence of rehospitalization of orthopaedic surgical patients could help to identify targets for more efficient perioperative care. We addressed two questions: What is the incidence of thirty-day readmission for orthopaedic patients at an academic hospital? Can any risk factors for readmission be identified among rehospitalized patients?, Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study examining 3264 orthopaedic surgical admissions during two fiscal years from the hospital's quality-improvement database. Cases of patients with unplanned readmission within thirty days were subjected to univariate and multivariate analysis to determine the odds ratio (OR) for readmission. Further descriptive analysis was performed with use of electronic medical record data from the cohort of readmitted patients., Results: The estimated cumulative incidence of unplanned thirty-day readmissions was 4.2% (i.e., 138 of the 3261 patients who were eligible for the study). Multivariate analysis indicated that marital status of "widowed" significantly increased the risk of readmission (OR, 1.846; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.070 to 3.184; p = 0.03). Race significantly increased the odds of readmission in patients identified as African-American (OR, 2.178; 95% CI, 1.077 to 4.408; p = 0.03), or American Indian or Alaskan Native race (OR, 3.550; 95% CI, 1.429 to 8.815; p = 0.006). The risk of readmission was significant at p &lt; 0.10 (OR 1.547; 95% CI, 0.941 to 2.545; p = 0.09) for patients with Medicaid insurance. Any intensive care unit stay gave the highest OR of readmission (OR, 2.356; 95% CI, 1.361 to 4.079; p = 0.002) for all demographic groups. Mean length of hospital stay was significantly longer, 5.9 days in the unplanned readmission group compared with 3.6 days for non-readmitted patients (OR, 1.038; 95% CI, 1.014 to 1.062; p = 0.002). Chart review of readmitted patients showed that 102 readmissions (73.9%) were classified as surgical; of these, thirty-five readmission events (34.3%) were for infection at the surgical site., Conclusions: Longer length of hospital stay or admission to the intensive care unit significantly increased the likelihood of thirty-day readmission, regardless of demographics or discharge disposition. Marital status, Medicaid insurance status, and race may indicate how a patient's social and economic resources can impact his or her risk of being readmitted to the hospital., Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: In-hospital falls can result in substantial morbidity and mortality and were declared "never events" by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in 2008. Interventions that were intended to reduce the incidence of falls based on patient risk factors have not been successful in the acute inpatient setting. We hypothesized that a systems-based fall-prevention program targeting high-risk situations would result in fewer falls with injury., Methods: Falls that occurred in the prospective postintervention period were reviewed in real time with use of a clinical database that could be accessed by all physicians, nurses, aides, and therapists. Analysis of the hospital setting, patient factors, and circumstances associated with all falls occurring on the hospital's orthopaedic ward were evaluated during the preintervention study period. On the basis of the findings from this audit, four systems-based interventions were implemented. Prospective analysis of these interventions was then conducted. All falls were tracked by means of the clinical database and reviewed by the study investigators. The rates of falls with injury and total falls in the preintervention and postintervention periods were compared., Results: The preintervention study period (May 1, 2007, to September 28, 2008) represented 11,082 patient days, during which time the fall with injury rate and total fall rate were 1.17 and 4.24, respectively, per 1000 patient days. The postintervention study period (September 29, 2008, to May 1, 2010) represented 12,267 patient days, during which time the fall with injury rate and the total fall rate were 0.41 and 2.53, respectively, per 1000 patient days. The reductions in the rates of falls with injury (p = 0.036) and total falls (p = 0.024) were significant., Conclusion: Utilization of a continuous quality improvement model to develop a systems-based fall-prevention program can be effective in reducing falls with injury and total falls in an acute inpatient setting. Despite a thoughtful, multidisciplinary, intensive approach to the problem, falls did occur. We believe that it is unrealistic to consider all falls to be preventable.