Search

Our study aimed to describe patient experience of information coordination between their primary care physician and specialists and to examine the associations between their experience and their personal and primary care characteristics. We conducted a cross-sectional study of Ontario residents rostered to a primary care physician and visited a specialist physician in the previous 12 months by linking population-based health administrative data to the Health Care Experience Survey collected between 2013 and 2020. We described respondents' sociodemographic and health care utilization characteristics and their experience of information coordination between their primary care physician and specialists. We measured the adjusted association between patient-reported measures of information coordination before and after respondents received care from a specialist physician and their type of primary care model. 1,460 out 20,422 (weighted 7.5%) of the respondents reported that their specialist physician did not have basic medical information about their visit from their primary care physician in the previous 12 months. 2,298 out of 16,442 (weighted 14.9%) of the respondents reported that their primary care physician seemed uninformed about the care they received from the specialist. Females, younger individuals, those with a college or undergraduate level of education, and users of walk-in clinics had a higher likelihood of reporting a lack of information coordination between the primary care and specialist physicians. Only respondents rostered to an enhanced fee-for-service model had a higher odds of reporting that the specialist physician did not have basic medical information about their visit compared to those rostered to a Family Health Team (OR 1.22, 95% Cl 1.12–1.40). We found no significant association between respondent's type of primary care model and that their primary care physician was uninformed about the care received from the specialist physician. In this population-based health study, respondents reported high information coordination between their primary care physician and specialists. Except for respondents rostered to an enhanced fee-for-service model of care, we did not find any difference in information coordination across other primary care models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Current scores for predicting sepsis outcomes are limited by generalizability, complexity, and electronic medical record (EMR) integration. Here, we validate a simple EMR-based score for sepsis outcomes in a large multi-centre cohort. Design: A simple electronic medical record-based predictor of illness severity in sepsis (SEPSIS) score was developed (4 additive lab-based predictors) using a population-based retrospective cohort study. Setting: Internal medicine services across four academic teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada from April 2010—March 2015 (primary cohort) and 2015–2019 (secondary cohort). Patients: We identified patients admitted with sepsis based upon receipt of antibiotics and positive cultures. Measurements and main results: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes were ICU admission at 72 hours, and hospital length of stay (LOS). We calculated the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) for the SEPSIS score, qSOFA, and NEWS2. We then evaluated the SEPSIS score in a secondary cohort (2015–2019) of hospitalized patients receiving antibiotics. Our primary cohort included 1,890 patients with a median age of 72 years (IQR: 56–83). 9% died during hospitalization, 18.6% were admitted to ICU, and mean LOS was 12.7 days (SD: 21.5). In the primary and secondary (2015–2019, 4811 patients) cohorts, the AUROCs of the SEPSIS score for predicting in-hospital mortality were 0.63 and 0.64 respectively, which were similar to NEWS2 (0.62 and 0.67) and qSOFA (0.62 and 0.68). AUROCs for predicting ICU admission at 72 hours, and length of stay > 14 days, were similar between scores, in the primary and secondary cohorts. All scores had comparable calibration for predicting mortality. Conclusions: An EMR-based SEPSIS score shows a similar ability to predict important clinical outcomes compared with other validated scores (qSOFA and NEWS2). Because of the SEPSIS score's simplicity, it may prove a useful tool for clinical and research applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Repetitive elements (REs) are often expressed at higher levels in tumor cells than normal cells, implicating these genomic regions as an untapped pool of tumor-associated antigens. In ovarian cancer (OC), protein from the RE ERV-K is frequently expressed by tumor cells. Here we determined whether the targeting of a previously identified immunogenic epitope in the envelope gene (env) of ERV-K resulted in target antigen specificity in non-HIV-1 settings. We found that transducing healthy donor T cells with an ERV-K-Env-specific T cell receptor construct resulted in antigen specificity only when co-cultured with HLA-A*03:01 B lymphoblastoid cells. Furthermore, these transduced T cells were not specific for HLA-A*03:01 + OC cells nor for the cognate peptide in HLA-matched systems from multiple healthy donors. These data suggest that the ERV-K-Env epitope recognized by this T cell receptor is of low immunogenicity and has limited potential as a T cell target for OC., Competing Interests: Additional Declarations: Competing interest reported. Erin E. Grundy: no such conflicts exist Lauren C. Shaw: no such conflicts exist Daniel J. Powell Jr.: no such conflicts exist Mario Ostrowski: no such conflicts exist R. Brad Jones: no such conflicts exist C. Russell Y. Cruz: no such conflicts exist Heather Gordish-Dressman: no such conflicts exist Catherine M. Bollard: no such conflicts exist Katherine B. Chiappinelli: consultant for Rome Therapeutics DISCLOSURES & COMPETING INTERESTS KBC is a consultant for Rome Therapeutics.