Search

Context: Michigan is among 25 states that mandate health care professionals (HCPs) to report newborn drug exposure to Child Protective Services (CPS) under the US Child Abuse and Prevention Treatment Act. HCPs are more likely to report Black families to CPS for prenatal drug use than their White peers despite similar rates of drug use.1 2 CPS reports can facilitate parental drug treatment but can also lead to criminalization of substance use in pregnancy and contribute to health inequity for Black families. Objective: To examine factors associated with HCP decisions to obtain newborn drug testing (NDT) using an anti-racist and justice-informed approach. Study design and analysis: A retrospective cohort study. Setting and dataset: EHR data set from a large academic hospital in the Midwest US. Population studied: Mother-baby dyads receiving prenatal and birth care from 2014-2020. Intervention/Instrument: n/a. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was placement of an NDT order. We collected demographic data including age, race and ethnicity, marital status, insurance type, and neighborhood disadvantage score. Results: Data were available for 26,366 dyads and NDT orders were placed for 1,237 newborns. The rate of NDT ordering was 11.3% (n=359) for Black participants, the referent group for analysis. Unadjusted odds of NDT were lower for non-Hispanic White (OR 0.37, CI 0.32-0.42) than Black participants. Adjusted odds were lower for non-Hispanic White (OR 0.72, 0.57-0.91), non-Hispanic Other race (OR 0.5, CI 0.32-0.79), and Hispanic race (OR 0.4, 1.06). Of the 88% (1,090/1,237) NDTs with test results, 56% were positive for tetrahydrocannabinol, 18% for opioids, and <6% for amphetamine, cocaine, methamphetamine, and phencyclidine. There was no difference in the rate of positive drug tests across racial groups. Conclusions: Black families experience more newborn drug testing despite similar rates of positive drug tests. Interventions focused on racial inequity are urgently needed to reduce bias, overtesting, and subsequent criminalization and CPS investigation of Black birthing people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Improving hydration is a strategy commonly used by clinicians to prevent overeating with the goal of promoting a healthy weight among patients. The relationship between weight status and hydration, however, is unclear. Our objective was to assess the relationship between inadequate hydration and BMI and inadequate hydration and obesity among adults in the United States.Methods: Our study used a nationally representative sample from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2009 to 2012, and included adults aged 18 to 64 years. The primary outcome of interest was body mass index (BMI), measured in continuous values and also categorized as obese (BMI ≥30) or not (BMI <30). Individuals with urine osmolality values of 800 mOsm/kg or greater were considered to be inadequately hydrated. Linear and logistic regressions were performed with continuous BMI and obesity status as the outcomes, respectively. Models were adjusted for known confounders including age, race/ethnicity, sex, and income-to-poverty ratio.Results: In this nationally representative sample (n = 9,528; weighted n = 193.7 million), 50.8% were women, 64.5% were non-Hispanic white, and the mean age was 41 years. Mean urine osmolality was 631.4 mOsm/kg (SD = 236.2 mOsm/kg); 32.6% of the sample was inadequately hydrated. In adjusted models, adults who were inadequately hydrated had higher BMIs (1.32 kg/m(2); 95% CI, 0.85-1.79; P <.001) and higher odds of being obese (OR = 1.59; 95% CI, 1.35-1.88; P <.001) compared with hydrated adults.Conclusion: We found a significant association between inadequate hydration and elevated BMI and inadequate hydration and obesity, even after controlling for confounders. This relationship has not previously been shown on a population level and suggests that water, an essential nutrient, may deserve greater focus in weight management research and clinical strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antidepressants are used by primary care providers to treat a variety of conditions, including (but not limited to) depression and anxiety. A trial-and-error approach is typically used to identify effective therapy, as treatment efficacy and safety can vary based on the response, which is affected by certain gene types. Pharmacokinetic pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing provides phenotypic classification of individuals as poor, intermediate, extensive, and ultrarapid CYP450 metabolizers, providing information for optimal drug selection. Objective: The objective of this pilot study is to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of PGx testing when used after starting a new antidepressant medication. Methods: We are conducting a pilot study with physicians from 6 Department of Family Medicine clinics at the University of Michigan who are willing to use PGx test results to manage antidepressant medication use. From enrolled physicians, patients were recruited to participate in a 6-month randomized, wait-list controlled trial in which patient participants newly prescribed an antidepressant had PGx testing and were randomized equally to have the results released to their primary care physician as soon as results were available or after 3 months. Patients were excluded if they had been taking the antidepressant for more than 4 weeks or if they had undergone PGx testing in the past. Physician participants completed a baseline survey to assess demographics, as well as knowledge, feasibility, and acceptability of PGx testing for this population. At the conclusion of the study, physician participants will complete a survey to assess knowledge, satisfaction, feasibility, acceptability, perceived effectiveness, and barriers to widespread adoption of PGx testing. Patient participants will complete a baseline, 3-month, and 6-month assessment, and control patient participants will have an additional 9-month assessment. Data collected will include the reason for antidepressant use, self-reported medication adherence, side effects, patient health questionnaire 8-item depression scale, generalized anxiety disorder 7-item scale, 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, work status or changes, and physician and emergency department visits. PGx knowledge and perceptions (including acceptability and feasibility) as well as demographic information will also be obtained. Results: We recruited 23 physician participants between November 2017 and January 2019, and 52 patient participants between January 2018 and April 2019. Currently, all physician and patient participants have been recruited, and we expect data collection to conclude in January 2020. Conclusions: This study will examine the preliminary effectiveness of PGx testing after treatment initiation and determine the feasibility and acceptability of PGx testing for use in primary care. Through this study, we expect to demonstrate the benefit of PGx testing and lay the foundation for translating this approach into use within primary care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03270891; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03270891 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/13848 We help JMIR researchers to raise funds to pursue their research and development aimed at tackling important health and technology challenges. If you would like to show your support for this author, please donate using the button below. The funds raised will directly benefit the corresponding author of this article (minus 8% admin fees). Your donations will help this author to continue publishing open access papers in JMIR journals. Donations of over $100 may also be acknowledged in future publications. Suggested contribution levels: $20/$50/$100 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This study examines the impact of Family HealthwareTM on communication behaviors; specifically, communication with family members and health care providers about family health history. Methods A total of 3786 participants were enrolled in the Family HealthwareTM Impact Trial (FHITr) in the United States from 2005-7. The trial employed a two-arm cluster-randomized design, with primary care practices serving as the unit of randomization. Using generalized estimating equations (GEE), analyses focused on communication behaviors at 6month follow-up, adjusting for age, site and practice clustering. Results A significant interaction was observed between study arm and baseline communication status for the family communication outcomes (p's<.01), indicating that intervention had effects of different magnitude between those already communicating at baseline and those who were not. Among participants who were not communicating at baseline, intervention participants had higher odds of communicating with family members about family history risk (OR=1.24, p=0.042) and actively collecting family history information at follow-up (OR=2.67, p=0.026). Family HealthwareTM did not have a significant effect on family communication among those already communicating at baseline, or on provider communication, regardless of baseline communication status. Greater communication was observed among those at increased familial risk for a greater number of diseases. Conclusion Family HealthwareTM prompted more communication about family history with family members, among those who were not previously communicating. Efforts are needed to identify approaches to encourage greater sharing of family history information, particularly with health care providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individuals with hearing loss (HL) are at higher risk for hospitalizations, and may be for readmissions, compared with their hearing peers. The objective of this prospective study was to confirm retrospective studies suggesting that HL increases hospital readmissions, and, if confirmed, possible causes for it., Methods: A prospective cohort study of English-speaking patients > 55 years old admitted to general medical and surgical floors at 2 large hospital systems in southeastern Michigan over a 2-year period was conducted. All patients underwent bedside audiometric testing. HL presence and severity were categorized using World Health Organization pure tone assessment parameters. Readmission rates, Charlson comorbidity index, socio-demographic and medical variables were obtained from Epic EMR databases., Outcomes: There were 1247 hospitalized patients enrolled. Of these, 76.8% had documented HL of which 50.5% (630) was mild HL and 26.3% (328) moderate or worse HL. Patients with any HL were older and more likely to be non-Hispanic, white, male, and had less education, lower health literacy, more comorbidities, and more difficulty communicating with their doctor. Readmission rates at 30 and 90-days were similar between HL and hearing groups, after adjusting for HL severity, Charlston index, and numerous potential confounders., Conclusion: Patients with HL do not seem to have higher rates of hospital readmissions. We did find high frequency of HL in hospitalized patients along with significant communication difficulties that patients had with their clinicians. These findings have implications for measures to improve patient-physician communication, potentially improving long-term health outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise., (© Copyright by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Purpose: To test whether technology-facilitated self-management support improves depression in primary care settings. Methods: We randomized 204 low-income primary care patients who had at least moderate depressive symptoms to intervention or control. Intervention participants received 12 months of weekly automated interactive voice response telephone calls that assessed their symptom severity and provided self-management strategies. Their patient-nominated supporter (CarePartner) received corresponding guidance on self-management support, and their primary care team received urgent notifications. Those randomized to enhanced usual care received printed generic self-management instructions. Results: One-year attrition rate was 14%. By month 6, symptom severity on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) decreased 2.5 points more in the intervention arm than in the control arm (95% CI -4.2 to -0.8, p  = 0.003). This benefit was similar at month 12 ( p  = 0.004). Intervention was also over twice as likely to lead to ≥50% reduction in symptom severity by month 6 (OR = 2.2 (1.1, 4.7)) and a decrease of ≥5 PHQ-9 points by month 12 (OR = 2.3 (1.2, 4.4)). Conclusions: Technology-facilitated self-management guidance with lay support and clinician notifications improves depression for primary care patients. Subsequent research should examine implementation and generalization to other chronic conditions. clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT01834534.

Background: Users of American Sign Language (ASL) who are deaf often face barriers receiving health information, contributing to significant gaps in health knowledge and health literacy. To reduce the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its risk to the public, the government and health care providers have encouraged social distancing, use of face masks, hand hygiene, and quarantines. Unfortunately, COVID-19 information has rarely been available in ASL, which puts the deaf community at a disadvantage for accessing reliable COVID-19 information., Objective: This study's primary objective was to compare COVID-19-related information access between participants who are deaf and participants who are hearing., Methods: The study included 104 adults who are deaf and 74 adults who are hearing who had participated in a prior health literacy study. Surveys were conducted between April and July 2020 via video conference, smartphone apps, or phone calls. COVID-19 data were linked with preexisting data on demographic and health literacy data as measured by the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) and the ASL-NVS., Key Results: Neither group of participants differed in their ability to identify COVID-19 symptoms. Adults who are deaf were 4.7 times more likely to report difficulty accessing COVID-19 information ( p = .011), yet reported using more preventive strategies overall. Simultaneously, adults who are deaf had 60% lower odds of staying home and calling their doctor versus seeking health care immediately or doing something else compared with participants who are hearing if they suspected that they had COVID-19 ( p = .020)., Conclusions: Additional education on recommended COVID-19 management and guidance on accessible health care navigation strategies are needed for the deaf community and health care providers. Public health officials should ensure that public service announcements are accessible to all audiences and should connect with trusted agents within the deaf community to help disseminate health information online in ASL through their social media channels. [ HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice . 2021;5(2):e162-e170.] Plain Language Summary: Compared to participants who are hearing, a higher portion of participants who are deaf reported challenges with accessing, understanding, and trusting COVID-19 information. Although respondents who are deaf had similar knowledge of symptoms compared to participants who are hearing, they used more prevention strategies and were more likely to plan immediate care for suspected symptoms. Improved guidance on COVID-19 management and health care navigation accessible to the deaf community is needed.