Search

Importance: Nudges have been increasingly studied as a tool for facilitating behavior change and may represent a novel way to modify the electronic health record (EHR) to encourage evidence-based care., Objective: To evaluate the association between EHR nudges and health care outcomes in primary care settings and describe implementation facilitators and barriers., Evidence Review: On June 9, 2023, an electronic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science for all articles about clinician-facing EHR nudges. After reviewing titles, abstracts, and full texts, the present review was restricted to articles that used a randomized clinical trial (RCT) design, focused on primary care settings, and evaluated the association between EHR nudges and health care quality and patient outcome measures. Two reviewers abstracted the following elements: country, targeted clinician types, medical conditions studied, length of evaluation period, study design, sample size, intervention conditions, nudge mechanisms, implementation facilitators and barriers encountered, and major findings. The findings were qualitatively reported by type of health care quality and patient outcome and type of primary care condition targeted. The Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was adapted to evaluate the studies based on RCT design (cluster, parallel, crossover). Studies were scored from 0 to 5 points, with higher scores indicating lower risk of bias., Findings: Fifty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, most studies (79.6%) were assessed to have a moderate risk of bias. Most or all descriptive (eg, documentation patterns) (30 of 38) or patient-centeredness measures (4 of 4) had positive associations with EHR nudges. As for other measures of health care quality and patient outcomes, few had positive associations between EHR nudges and patient safety (4 of 12), effectiveness (19 of 48), efficiency (0 of 4), patient-reported outcomes (0 of 3), patient adherence (1 of 2), or clinical outcome measures (1 of 7)., Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found low- and moderate-quality evidence that suggested that EHR nudges were associated with improved descriptive measures (eg, documentation patterns). Meanwhile, it was unclear whether EHR nudges were associated with improvements in other areas of health care quality, such as effectiveness and patient safety outcomes. Future research is needed using longer evaluation periods, a broader range of primary care conditions, and in deimplementation contexts.

Importance: An initial step to reducing emergency department (ED) visits among patients with cancer is to identify the characteristics of patients visiting the ED and examine which of those visits could be prevented., Objective: To explore nationwide trends and characteristics of ED visits and examine factors associated with potentially preventable ED visits and unplanned hospitalizations among patients with cancer in the US., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data on ED visits from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2019; US Cancer Statistics reports were used to estimate new cancer cases each year. Frequencies and trends among 35 510 014 ED visits by adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with cancer were calculated., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was potentially preventable ED visits, and secondary outcomes were unplanned hospitalizations and the immediacy of the ED visits. Potentially preventable ED visits were identified using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services definition. The Emergency Severity Index, a triage algorithm that ranks patients based on the urgency of their health care condition, was used to measure the immediacy of ED visits (immediate [most urgent], emergent, urgent, less urgent, and nonurgent), with the categories of immediate and emergent classified as high acuity. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to calculate trends in ED visits among patients with cancer over time. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the associations of patient, hospital, and temporal factors with potentially preventable ED use and ED use resulting in hospitalization., Results: Among 854 911 106 ED visits, 35 510 014 (4.2%) were made by patients with cancer (mean [SD] age, 66.2 [16.2] years); of those, 55.2% of visits were among women, 73.2% were among non-Hispanic White individuals, 89.8% were among patients living in a private residence, and 54.3% were among Medicare enrollees. A total of 18 316 373 ED visits (51.6%) were identified as potentially preventable, and 5 770 571 visits (21.3%) were classified as high acuity. From 2012 to 2019, potentially preventable ED visits increased from 1 851 692 to 3 214 276. Pain (36.9%) was the most common reason for potentially preventable ED visits. The number of patients who visited an ED because of pain increased from 1 192 197 in 2012 to 2 405 849 in 2019 (a 101.8% increase). Overall, 28.9% of ED visits resulted in unplanned hospitalizations, which did not change significantly over time (from 32.2% in 2012 to 26.6% in 2019; P = .78 for trend). Factors such as residence in a nursing home (odds ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.25-2.41) were positively associated with having a potentially preventable ED visit, and factors such as the presence of more than 1 comorbidity (odds ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.43-2.32) were positively associated with having an unplanned hospitalization., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, 51.6% of ED visits among patients with cancer were identified as potentially preventable, and the absolute number of potentially preventable ED visits increased substantially between 2012 and 2019. These findings highlight the need for cancer care programs to implement evidence-based interventions to better manage cancer treatment complications, such as uncontrolled pain, in outpatient and ambulatory settings.

Importance: Patients with cancer typically have greater financial hardships and time costs than individuals without cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this, while posing substantial challenges to delivering cancer care and resulting in important changes in care-delivery models, including the rapid adoption of telehealth., Objective: To estimate patient travel, time, and cost savings associated with telehealth for cancer care delivery., Design, Setting, and Participants: An economic evaluation of cost savings from completed telehealth visits from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, in a single-institution National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All patients aged 18 to 65 years who completed telehealth visits within the designated time frame and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record were included in the study cohort. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to June 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was estimated patient cost savings from telehealth, which included 2 components: costs of travel (defined as roundtrip distance saved from car travel) and potential loss of productivity due to the medical visit (defined as loss of income from roundtrip travel plus loss of income from in-person clinic visits). Two different models with a combination of 2 different mileage rates ($0.56 and $0.82 per mile) and census tract-level median hourly wages were used., Results: The study included 25 496 telehealth visits with 11 688 patients. There were 4525 (3795 patients) new or established visits and 20 971 (10 049 patients) follow-up visits. Median (IQR) age was 55.0 (46.0-61.0) years among the telehealth visits, with 15 663 visits (61.4%) by women and 18 360 visits (72.0%) by Hispanic non-White patients. According to cost models, the estimated mean (SD) total cost savings ranged from $147.4 ($120.1) at $0.56/mile to $186.1 ($156.9) at $0.82/mile. For new or established visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit ranged from $176.6 ($136.3) at $0.56/mile to $222.8 ($177.4) at $0.82/mile, and for follow-up visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit was $141.1 ($115.3) at $0.56/mile to $178.1 ($150.9) at $0.82/mile., Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation, telehealth was associated with savings in patients time and travel costs, which may reduce the financial toxicity of cancer care. Expansion of telehealth oncology services may be an effective strategy to reduce the financial burden among patients with cancer.

Importance: Area-level factors have been identified as important social determinants of health (SDoH) that impact many health-related outcomes. Less is known about how the social vulnerability index (SVI), as a scalable composite score, can multidimensionally explain the population-based cancer screening program uptake at a county level., Objective: To examine the geographic variation of US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates and the association between county-level SVI and the 3 screening rates., Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cross-sectional study used county-level information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's PLACES and SVI data sets from 2018 for 3141 US counties. Analyses were conducted from October 2021 to February 2022., Exposures: Social vulnerability index score categorized in quintiles., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was county-level rates of USPSTF guideline-concordant, up-to-date breast, cervical, and colorectal screenings. Odds ratios were calculated for each cancer screening by SVI quintile as unadjusted (only accounting for eligible population per county) or adjusted for urban-rural status, percentage of uninsured adults, and primary care physician rate per 100 000 residents., Results: Across 3141 counties, county-level cancer screening rates showed regional disparities ranging from 54.0% to 81.8% for breast cancer screening, from 69.9% to 89.7% for cervical cancer screening, and from 39.8% to 74.4% for colorectal cancer screening. The multivariable regression model showed that a higher SVI was significantly associated with lower odds of cancer screening, with the lowest odds in the highest SVI quintile. When comparing the highest quintile of SVI (SVI-Q5) with the lowest quintile of SVI (SVI-Q1), the unadjusted odds ratio was 0.86 (95% posterior credible interval [CrI], 0.84-0.87) for breast cancer screening, 0.80 (95% CrI, 0.79-0.81) for cervical cancer screening, and 0.72 (95% CrI, 0.71-0.73) for colorectal cancer screening. When fully adjusted, the odds ratio was 0.92 (95% CrI, 0.90-0.93) for breast cancer screening, 0.87 (95% CrI, 0.86-0.88) for cervical cancer screening, and 0.86 (95% CrI, 0.85-0.88) for colorectal cancer screening, showing slightly attenuated associations., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, regional disparities were found in cancer screening rates at a county level. Quantifying how SVI associates with each cancer screening rate could provide insight into the design and focus of future interventions targeting cancer prevention disparities.

Importance: Bariatric surgery effectively treats severe obesity and metabolic diseases. However, individual outcomes vary depending on sustainable lifestyle change. Little is known about lifestyle patterns after bariatric surgery among the US population., Objective: To compare the level of physical activity and eating behavior among postbariatric surgery patients, individuals eligible for surgery, and those with normal weight., Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study using nationally representative survey data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2015-2018. Respondents included for analysis were age 18 years or older, and categorized by individuals with normal weight, individuals who received bariatric surgery, and individuals clinically eligible for bariatric surgery. Analyses were performed from February to October 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported measures were used to assess physical activity (moderate-to-vigorous physical activity [MVPA], sedentary activity, and whether PA guidelines were met) and eating behaviors (total energy intake and Healthy Eating Index [HEI]-2015 diet quality scores)., Results: Of 4659 study participants (mean [SD] age, 46.1 [18.6] years; 2638 [weighted percentage, 58.8%] women; 1114 [weighted percentage, 12.7%] Black, 1570 [weighted percentage, 68.6%] White), 132 (3.7%) reported that they had undergone any bariatric surgery. Median (IQR) time since surgery was 7 (3-10) years. After propensity-score weighting, individuals who underwent bariatric surgery reported more time spent in MVPA than those eligible for surgery (147.9 min/wk vs 97.4 min/wk). Among respondents with normal weight, 45.6% (95% CI, 40.8% to 52.4%) reported meeting PA guidelines, almost 2 times higher than those in the bariatric surgery (23.1%; 95% CI, 13.8% to 32.4%) or in the surgery-eligible group (20.3%; 95% CI, 15.6% to 25.1%). Propensity-score weighted overall HEI was higher for individuals with normal weight (54.4; 95% CI, 53.0 to 55.9) than those who underwent bariatric surgery (50.0; 95% CI, 47.2 to 52.9) or were eligible for the surgery (48.0; 95% CI, 46.0 to 50.0). Across all HEI components, mean scores were similar between the bariatric surgery and surgery-eligible groups. Total energy intake was the lowest among those who underwent bariatric surgery (1746 kcal/d; 95% CI, 1554 to 1937 kcal/d), followed by those with normal weight (1943 kcal/d; 95% CI, 1873 to 2013 kcal/d) and those eligible for bariatric surgery (2040 kcal/d; 1953 to 2128 kcal/d)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, individuals who underwent bariatric surgery had beneficial lifestyle patterns compared with those eligible for surgery; however, these improvements seemed suboptimal based on the current guidelines. Efforts are needed to incorporate benefits of physical activity and a healthy, balanced diet in postbariatric care.

Importance: Cervical cancer screening rates are suboptimal in the US. Population-based assessment of reasons for not receiving screening is needed, particularly among women from historically underserved demographic groups., Objective: To estimate changes in US Preventive Service Task Force guideline-concordant cervical cancer screening over time and assess the reasons women do not receive up-to-date screening by sociodemographic factors., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pooled population-based cross-sectional study used data from the US National Health Interview Survey from 2005 and 2019. A total of 20 557 women (weighted, 113.1 million women) aged 21 to 65 years without previous hysterectomy were included. Analyses were conducted from March 30 to August 19, 2021., Exposures: Sociodemographic factors, including age, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, rurality of residence, and health insurance type., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were US Preventive Services Task Force guideline-concordant cervical cancer screening rates and self-reported primary reasons for not receiving up-to-date screening. For 2005, up-to-date screening was defined as screening every 3 years for women aged 21 to 65 years. For 2019, up-to-date screening was defined as screening every 3 years with a Papanicolaou test alone for women aged 21 to 29 years and screening every 3 years with a Papanicolaou test alone or every 5 years with high-risk human papillomavirus testing or cotesting for women aged 30 to 65 years. Population estimation included sampling weights., Results: Among 20 557 women (weighted, 113.1 million women) included in the study, most were aged 30 to 65 years (16 219 women; weighted, 86.3 million women [76.3%]) and had private insurance (13 571 women; weighted, 75.8 million women [67.0%]). With regard to race and ethnicity, 997 women (weighted, 6.9 million women [6.1%]) were Asian, 3821 women (weighted, 19.5 million women [17.2%]) were Hispanic, 2862 women (weighted, 14.8 million women [13.1%]) were non-Hispanic Black, 12 423 women (weighted, 69.0 million women [61.0%]) were non-Hispanic White, and 453 women (weighted, 3.0 million women [2.7%]) were of other races and/or ethnicities (including Alaska Native and American Indian [weighted, 955 000 women (0.8%)] and other single and multiple races or ethnicities [weighted, 2.0 million women (1.8%)]). In 2019, women aged 21 to 29 years had a significantly higher rate of overdue screening (29.1%) vs women aged 30 to 65 years (21.1%; P < .001). In both age groups, the proportion of women without up-to-date screening increased significantly from 2005 to 2019 (from 14.4% to 23.0%; P < .001). Significantly higher rates of overdue screening were found among those of Asian vs non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity (31.4% vs 20.1%; P = .01), those identifying as LGBQ+ (gender identity was not assessed because of a small sample) vs heterosexual (32.0% vs 22.2%; P < .001), those living in rural vs urban areas (26.2% vs 22.6%; P = .04), and those without insurance vs those with private insurance (41.7% vs 18.1%; P < .001). The most common reason for not receiving timely screening across all groups was lack of knowledge, ranging from 47.2% of women identifying as LGBQ+ to 64.4% of women with Hispanic ethnicity. Previous receipt of a human papillomavirus vaccine was not a primary reason for not having up-to-date screening (<1% of responses). From 2005 to 2019, among women aged 30 to 65 years, lack of access decreased significantly as a primary reason for not receiving screening (from 21.8% to 9.7%), whereas lack of knowledge (from 45.2% to 54.8%) and not receiving recommendations from health care professionals (from 5.9% to 12.0%) increased significantly., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that cervical cancer screening that was concordant with US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines decreased in the US between 2005 and 2019, with lack of knowledge reported as the biggest barrier to receiving timely screening. Campaigns addressing patient knowledge and provider communication may help to improve screening rates, and cultural adaptation of interventions is needed to reduce existing disparities.

Importance: Studies suggest the risk of suicide among people with cancer diagnosis is higher compared with the general population. However, little is known about how suicide risk among people diagnosed with cancer might vary according to area-level income and rurality., Objective: To examine whether the risks and patterns of suicide mortality among people with a cancer diagnosis differ by US county-level median income and rural or urban status., Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, population-based cohort study following up individuals who were diagnosed with cancer between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2016, was conducted. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program 18 registries (SEER 18) database was used to obtain data on persons diagnosed with a first primary malignant tumor. Comparisons with the general US population were based on mortality data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. Analyses were conducted from February 22 to October 14, 2020., Exposures: County-level median household income and urban or rural status., Main Outcomes and Measures: Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) of suicide deaths and annual percentage changes (APCs) of SMRs., Results: The SEER 18 database included 5 362 782 persons with cancer diagnoses living in 635 counties. Most study participants were men (51.2%), White (72.2%), and older than 65 years (49.7%). Among them, 6357 persons died of suicide (SMR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.38-1.44). People with cancer living in the lowest-income counties had a significantly higher risk (SMR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.76-2.13) than those in the highest-income counties (SMR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.26-1.34). Those living in rural counties also had significantly higher SMR than those in urban counties (SMR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.70-1.92 vs SMR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.32-1.39). For all county groups, the SMRs were the highest within the first year following cancer diagnosis. However, among people living in the lowest-income counties, the risk remained significantly high even after 10 or more years following cancer diagnosis (SMR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.31-2.48). The comparative risk of suicide mortality within 1 year following cancer diagnosis significantly decreased over the years but then plateaued in the highest-income (2005-2015: APC, 2.03%; 95% CI, -0.97% to 5.13%), lowest-income (2010-2015: APC, 4.80%; 95% CI, -19.97% to 37.24%), and rural (2004-2015: APC, 1.83; 95% CI, -1.98% to 5.79%) counties., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study showed disparities in suicide risks and their patterns among people diagnosed with cancer by county-level income and rural or urban status. The findings suggest that additional research and effort to provide psychological services addressing these disparities among people with cancer may be beneficial.

Importance: Little is known about the current use of imported drugs and the factors associated with individual purchase of medications outside the US., Objective: To evaluate the proportion of the US adult population that purchases medications in other countries and the patient factors associated with the behavior., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study used data from the 2015-2017 National Health Interview Survey. The study sample included 61 238 individuals 18 years or older who reported use of prescribed medication by a physician or other practitioner. Data analysis was performed in November 2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported experience of purchasing prescription drugs from countries outside the US in the past 12 months. Internet use behaviors for health care included searches for health information and filling of a prescription online. Medication-taking behaviors included skipping or delaying filling a prescription and using alternative therapies to save money. Survey design-adjusted analysis was used to estimate and compare characteristics between those who purchased medications outside the US and those did not. Multivariable logistic regression was fitted to examine the association of medication purchases with internet use and medication-taking behavior factors., Results: Among 61 238 US adults taking prescription medications (mean [SD] age, 50.5 [18.5] years; 56.5% female; 70.8% white), the estimated prevalence of purchasing of medication outside the US was 1.5% (95% CI, 1.4%-1.7%; 2.3 million US individuals). Those who purchased medications outside the US were more likely to be older (age >64 years; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.68; 95% CI, 1.24-2.29), to be from Hispanic (aOR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.23-2.35) or immigrant populations (aOR, 3.20; 95% CI, 2.44-4.20), and to have higher educational attainment (bachelor's degree; aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.27-2.54), lower family income (low income; aOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.06-1.87), and lack of insurance (aOR, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.33-4.21). Data analyses indicated that online health information-seeking behavior (aOR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.33-1.98) or use of an online pharmacy (aOR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.83-2.90) was associated with a greater likelihood of medication purchases outside the US. Individuals who skipped medications (aOR, 3.86; 95% CI, 3.05-4.88) or delayed filling a prescription (aOR, 4.04, 95% CI, 3.23-5.06) also had higher odds of purchasing medication outside the US., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that patients are not using prescription purchases outside the US to meet their medication needs. However, monitoring to promote safe administration of medications imported into the US should be continued.