Search

Electronic health record (EHR) tools such as documentation shortcuts and ordering templates are designed to enhance both the efficiency and quality of care delivery. Use of such tools vary widely in primary care. Understanding patterns of use as a means to identify priority areas for improvement are lacking. Objective: This study is designed to identify and understand patterns of EHR efficiency use among primary care clinicians as a means to inform training support needs. Study Design: Retrospective observational study. Setting or Dataset: 340 Community Health Centers (CHCs) across 48 US states from the OCHIN Network. Population Studied: The OCHIN's network and 2033 primary care clinicians engaged in patient care at least 2 days a week during DEC 2019-FEB 2020. Methods: Six EHR efficiency indicators were drawn from the Epic EHR Signal efficiency indicators which are automatically generated monthly for clinicians. Indicators include: use of quick actions, preference lists, level of service and diagnosis speed buttons and chart search functions and notes written with smart tools. A weighted score of these indicators represented overall EHR proficiency with a possible range of 0- 10 with higher scores suggesting higher efficiency. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify clusters of clinicians defined by distinct patterns of efficiency indicators. Results: The median EHR proficiency score was 4 and ranged from 0 to 9.5. The 9 cluster LPA solution the best overall fit. Clusters represented different patterns with notable strengths and deficiencies in EHR use efficiency. Cluster 2 was large (n=518) and characterized by being low on all indicators except for chart search. In contrast, cluster 9 was very small (n=12) and characterized by high scores for 4/6 indicators and low on quick actions. Conclusions: Substantial variation in EHR use efficiency among primary care clinicians was observed and can be represented by nine different patterns of indicators. These patterns show strengths and deficiencies in EHR use efficiency and could guide a tailored training approach to improve EHR efficiency., Presenters Jeremy Erroba, Miguel Marino, PhD, Rachel Gold, PhD, MPH, Rachel Springer, MS, Jennifer DeVoe, MD, DrPH, FAAFP, DPhil, Susan Flocke, PhD, David Boston, MD, [...]

Context: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) disproportionally affects racial and ethnic minority populations. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) have long been first-line pharmacotherapy for ASCVD prevention. Measures recommended to guide statin indication changed in 2013 guidelines aimed at improving ASCVD prevention and reducing ASCVD disparities. It is unknown whether risk screening for initiating statins for primary prevention of ASCVD differs across race and ethnicity. Objective: Examine racial/ethnic/language differences in electronic health record (EHR) prevalence of ASCVD screening measures used for statin consideration. Specifically, compare Asian, Latino, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White adults further distinguished by language preference. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: ADVANCE (Advancing Data Value Across a National Community Health Center) network-a PCORNet data network-635 community health centers (CHCs) in 24 US states with a shared EHR platform. Population: Adults 50+ years with =1 primary care encounter in the network 2009-2013, and/or 2014-2018. Outcome measures: Prevalence of period-specific guideline concordant screening measures for statin consideration in 2009-2013: low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and 2014-2018: pooled cohort equation (PCE) components of age, sex, race, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, smoking status. For patients seen in both periods, we assessed change in period-specific measure prevalence. Outcomes were analyzed using GEE logistic regression to measure the association between race/ethnicity/language and measurement prevalence. Results: Adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, compared to English-preferring non-Hispanic White patients, all other groups were more likely to have LDL documented (2009-2013, N=195,061) and all PCE components documented (2014-2018, N=344,504). Among those seen in both periods (N=128,621), all groups had lower odds of having PCE components vs. LDL documented in the measures' respective period; English-preferring non-Hispanic Black adults experienced a greater decline in measure documentation across the two periods compared to English-preferring non-Hispanic White adults (odds ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.91). Conclusions: CHCs may mitigate racial/ethnic/language disparities in the collection of screening measures for ASCVD prevention, which did not improve after the 2013 guideline change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Understanding how the COVID-19 pandemic affected cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk monitoring in primary care may inform new approaches for addressing modifiable CVD risks. This study examined how pandemic-driven changes in primary care delivery affected CVD risk management processes. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective study used electronic health record data from patients at 70 primary care community clinics with scheduled appointments from September 1, 2018, to September 30, 2021. METHODS: Analyses examined associations between appointment type and select care process measures: appointment completion rates, time to appointment, and up-to-date documentation for blood pressure (BP) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). RESULTS: Of 1,179,542 eligible scheduled primary care appointments, completion rates were higher for virtual care (VC) vs in-person appointments (10.7 percentage points [PP]; 95% CI, 10.5-11.0; P < .001). Time to appointment was shorter for VC vs in-person appointments (--3.9 days; 95% CI, --4.1 to --3.7; P < .001). BP documentation was higher for appointments completed pre-- vs post pandemic onset (16.2 PP; 95% CI, 16.0-16.5; P < .001) and for appointments completed in person vs VC (54.9 PP; 95% CI, 54.6-55.2; P < .001). HbA1c documentation was higher for completed appointments after pandemic onset vs before (5.9 PP; 95% CI, 5.1-6.7; P < .001) and for completed VC appointments vs in-person appointments (3.9 PP; 95% CI, 3.0-4.7; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: After pandemic onset, appointment completion rates were higher, time to appointment was shorter, HbA1c documentation increased, and BP documentation decreased. Future research should explore the advantages of using VC for CVD risk management while continuing to monitor for unintended consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Racial and ethnic minorities in the United States have higher mortality/morbidity from cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to non-Hispanic whites, and some evidence has suggested that poor risk factor control, including appropriate prescribing of statins for lipid disorders and CVD risk reduction, contributes to these disparities. It is uncertain if the 2013 American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) guideline change for statin prescription affected this disparity. Objective: To compare the prevalence of patients with guideline indications for statin prescribing, and to compare prescribing prevalence before and after this major guideline change between racial and ethnic groups, by preferred language. Study Design: Retrospective, cohort study. Setting/Dataset: A national network of community health centers (CHCs) linked by a common electronic health record dataset. Population studied: Patients were age 50-73, and had =1 primary care visit in 2009-2013 and/or 2014-2018. Outcomes: By period, 1) proportion with period-specific indications for statin initiation 2) proportion with a statin prescription if indicated. Results: In the 2009-2013 period (N=109,330), non-English preferring White (OR=1.41, 95% CI 1.15-1.72), Black (OR=1.25, 95% CI 1.10-1.41), and Latino patients (OR=1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.16) had higher odds of meeting guideline indications for statins than Non-Hispanic White English preferring patients, and of those meeting indications, all except Black non-English patients had higher odds of statin prescription. In the 2014-2018 period (N=319,094), all groups except Latino English-preferred and White Non-English preferred patients had higher odds of meeting the new guideline indications for statin prescription. Of those meeting indications in this period, Latino English speakers had similar odds of statin prescription as non-Hispanic whites; English preferring Black patients had lower odds (OR=0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.99). Conclusions: CHCs provide CVD screening and statin prescriptions for thousands of racial, ethnic, and language minorities, even more so than some non-Hispanic white English speakers. However, disparities appeared for English preferring Latino and Black patients after the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline change. The evaluation of major clinical guideline changes should account for their impact on racial and ethnic disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Limited research has assessed how virtual care (VC) affects cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk management, especially in community clinic settings. This study assessed change in community clinic patients' CVD risk management during the COVID-19 pandemic and CVD risk factor control among patients who had primarily in-person or primarily VC visits. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective interrupted time-series analysis. METHODS: Data came from an electronic health record shared by 52 community clinics for index (March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020) and follow-up (July 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022) periods. Analyses compared follow-up period changes in slope and level of population monthly means of 10-year reversible CVD risk score, blood pressure (BP), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) among patients whose completed follow-up period visits were primarily in person vs primarily VC. Propensity score weighting minimized confounding. RESULTS: There were 10,028 in-person and 6593 VC patients in CVD risk analyses, 9874 in-person and 5390 VC patients in BP analyses, and 8221 in-person and 4937 VC patients in HbA1c analyses. The VC group was more commonly younger, female, White, and urban. Mean reversible CVD risk, mean systolic BP, and percentage of BP measurements that were 140/90 mm Hg or higher increased significantly from index to follow-up periods in both groups. Rate of change between these periods was the same for all outcomes in both groups, regardless of care modality. CONCLUSIONS: Among community clinic patients with CVD risk, receiving a majority of care in person vs a majority of care via VC was not significantly associated with longitudinal trends in reversible CVD risk score or key CVD risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Adoption of mask wearing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic alters daily communication., Objective: To assess communication barriers associated with mask wearing in patient-clinician interactions and individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot cross-sectional survey study included the general population, health care workers, and health care workers who are deaf or hard of hearing in the United States. Volunteers were sampled via an opt-in survey panel and nonrandomized convenience sampling. The general population survey was conducted between January 5 and January 8, 2021. The health care worker surveys were conducted between December 3, 2020, and January 3, 2021. Respondents viewed 2 short videos of a study author wearing both a standard and transparent N95 mask and answered questions regarding mask use, communication, preference, and fit. Surveys took 15 to 20 minutes to complete., Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants' perceptions were assessed surrounding the use of both mask types related to communication and the ability to express emotions., Results: The national survey consisted of 1000 participants (mean [SD] age, 48.7 [18.5] years; 496 [49.6%] women) with a response rate of 92.25%. The survey of general health care workers consisted of 123 participants (mean [SD] age, 49.5 [9.0] years; 84 [68.3%] women), with a response rate of 11.14%. The survey of health care workers who are deaf or hard of hearing consisted of 45 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.5 [9.0] years; 30 [66.7%] women) with a response rate of 23.95%. After viewing a video demonstrating a study author wearing a transparent N95 mask, 781 (78.1%) in the general population, 109 general health care workers (88.6%), and 38 health care workers who are deaf or hard of hearing (84.4%) were able to identify the emotion being expressed, in contrast with 201 (20.1%), 25 (20.5%), and 11 (24.4%) for the standard opaque N95 mask. In the general population, 450 (45.0%) felt positively about interacting with a health care worker wearing a transparent mask; 76 general health care workers (61.8%) and 37 health care workers who are deaf or hard of hearing (82.2%) felt positively about wearing a transparent mask to communicate with patients., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that transparent masks could help improve communication during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly for individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing.

Objectives: We examined sexual-orientation disparities in frequent engagement in cancer-related risk indicators of tobacco, alcohol, diet and physical activity, ultraviolet radiation, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs)., Methods: We used longitudinal data from the national Growing Up Today Study (1999-2010). Of the analytic sample (n = 9958), 1.8% were lesbian or gay (LG), 1.6% bisexual (BI), 12.1% mostly heterosexual (MH), and 84.5% completely heterosexual (CH)., Results: More sexual minorities (LGs, BIs, and MHs) than CHs frequently engaged in multiple cancer-related risk behaviors (33%, 29%, 28%, and 19%, respectively). Sexual-minority young women, especially BI and MH, more frequently engaged over time in substance use and diet and physical activity risk than CH women. More young gay than CH men frequently engaged over time in vomiting for weight control (odds ratio [OR] = 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1, 9.4), being physically inactive (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.2, 2.4), and using tanning booths (OR = 4.7; 95% CI = 3.0, 7.4), and had a higher prevalence of ever having an STI (OR = 3.5; 95% CI = 2.0, 6.4). Individual analyses were generally comparable to the group-level analyses., Conclusions: Young sexual minorities are at risk for cancer through frequent exposure to cancer-related risk behaviors over time. Long-term, longitudinal studies and surveillance data are essential and warranted to track frequent engagement in the risk behaviors and cancer-related morbidity and mortality.