Search

Objective To describe MiPATH (the Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare) in pregnancy panel process and key recommendations for prenatal care delivery. Methods We conducted an appropriateness study using the RAND Corporation and University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, a modified e-Delphi process, to develop MiPATH recommendations using sequential steps: 1) definition and scope of key terms, 2) literature review and data synthesis, 3) case scenario development, 4) panel selection and scenario revisions, and 5) two rounds of panel appropriateness ratings with deliberation. Recommendations were developed for average-risk pregnant individuals (eg, individuals not requiring care by maternal-fetal medicine specialists). Because prenatal services (eg, laboratory tests, vaccinations) have robust evidence, panelists considered only how services are delivered (eg, visit frequency, telemedicine). Results The appropriateness of key aspects of prenatal care delivery across individuals with and without common medical and pregnancy complications, as well as social and structural determinants of health, was determined by the panel. Panelists agreed that a risk assessment for medical, social, and structural determinants of health should be completed as soon as individuals present for care. Additionally, the panel provided recommendations for: 1) prenatal visit schedules (care initiation, visit timing and frequency, routine pregnancy assessments), 2) integration of telemedicine (virtual visits and home devices), and 3) care individualization. Panelists recognized significant gaps in existing evidence and the need for policy changes to support equitable care with changing practices. Conclusion The MiPATH recommendations offer more flexible prenatal care delivery for average-risk individuals.

BackgroundThe Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC) provides evidence-based criteria for peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) use. Whether implementing MAGIC improves PICC appropriateness and reduces complications is unknown.MethodsA quasiexperimental study design to implement MAGIC in 52 Michigan hospitals was used. Data were collected from medical records by trained abstractors. Hospital performance on three appropriateness criteria was measured: short-term PICC use (≤5 days), use of multilumen PICCs and PICC placement in patients with chronic kidney disease. PICC appropriateness and device complications preintervention (January 2013 to December 2016) versus postintervention (January 2017 to January 2020) were compared. Change-point analysis was used to evaluate the effect of the intervention on device appropriateness. Logistic regression and Poisson models were fit to assess the association between appropriateness and complications (composite of catheter occlusion, venous thromboembolism (VTE) and central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI)).ResultsAmong 38 592 PICCs, median catheter dwell ranged from 8 to 56 days. During the preintervention period, the mean frequency of appropriate PICC use was 31.9% and the mean frequency of complications was 14.7%. Following the intervention, PICC appropriateness increased to 49.0% (absolute difference 17.1%, pConclusionsImplementation of MAGIC in Michigan hospitals was associated with improved PICC appropriateness and fewer complications. These findings have important quality, safety and policy implications for hospitals, patients and payors.

Background Antibiotics are commonly prescribed to patients as they leave the hospital. We aimed to create a comprehensive metric to characterize antibiotic overuse after discharge among hospitalized patients treated for pneumonia or urinary tract infection (UTI), and to determine whether overuse varied across hospitals and conditions. Methods In a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients treated for pneumonia or UTI in 46 hospitals between 1 July 2017–30 July 2019, we quantified the proportion of patients discharged with antibiotic overuse, defined as unnecessary antibiotic use, excess antibiotic duration, or suboptimal fluoroquinolone use. Using linear regression, we assessed hospital-level associations between antibiotic overuse after discharge in patients treated for pneumonia versus a UTI. Results Of 21 825 patients treated for infection (12 445 with pneumonia; 9380 with a UTI), nearly half (49.1%) had antibiotic overuse after discharge (56.9% with pneumonia; 38.7% with a UTI). For pneumonia, 63.1% of overuse days after discharge were due to excess duration; for UTIs, 43.9% were due to treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria. The percentage of patients discharged with antibiotic overuse varied 5-fold among hospitals (from 15.9% [95% confidence interval, 8.7%–24.6%] to 80.6% [95% confidence interval, 69.4%–88.1%]) and was strongly correlated between conditions (regression coefficient = 0.85; P < .001). Conclusions Antibiotic overuse after discharge was common and varied widely between hospitals. Antibiotic overuse after discharge was associated between conditions, suggesting that the prescribing culture, physician behavior, or organizational processes contribute to overprescribing at discharge. Multifaceted efforts focusing on all 3 types of overuse and multiple conditions should be considered to improve antibiotic prescribing at discharge., Of 21 825 hospitalized patients with pneumonia or urinary tract infection in 46 hospitals, half (49.1%) had antibiotic overuse after discharge. Overuse varied 5-fold among hospitals (15.9%–80.6%) and was correlated between conditions. To improve prescribing, stewardship should include care transitions.

OBJECTIVE: To critically review the evidence for the selection and insertion of pediatric vascular access devices (VADs). DATA SOURCES: Data were sourced from the US National Library of Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, the Cochrane Library databases, Embase, and international clinical trial databases. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews, cohort designs, randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi RCTs, before-after trials, or case-control studies that reported on complications and/or risk as well as reliability of VADs in patients aged 0 to 18 years were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Articles were independently reviewed to extract and summarize details on the number of patients and catheters, population, age of participants, VAD type, study method, indication, comparators, and the frequency of VAD failure or complications. RESULTS: VAD selection and insertion decision-making in general hospitalized and some specialized patient populations were well evidenced. The use of single-lumen devices and ultrasound-guided techniques was also broadly supported. There was a lack of RCTs, and for neonates, cardiac patients, patients with difficult venous access, midline catheters, catheter-to-vein ratio, and near-infrared devices, the lack of evidence necessitated broadening the review scope. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the lack of formal assessment of the quality of evidence and the lack of RCTs and systematic reviews. Consequently, clinical decision-making in certain pediatric populations is not guided by strong, evidence-based recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first synthesis of available evidence for the selection and insertion of VADs in pediatric patients and is important for determining the appropriateness of VADs in pediatric patients.

Objective To assess longitudinal primary care organization participation patterns in large-scale reform programs and identify organizational characteristics associated with multiprogram participation. Data sources Secondary data analysis of national program participation data over an eight-year period (2009-2016). Study design We conducted a retrospective, observational study by creating a unique set of data linkages (including Medicare and Medicaid Meaningful Use and Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organization (MSSP ACO) participation from CMS, Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) participation from the National Committee for Quality Assurance, and organizational characteristics) to measure longitudinal participation and identify what types of organizations participate in one or more of these reform programs. We used multivariate models to identify organizational characteristics that differentiate those that participate in none, one, or two-to-three programs. Data extraction methods We used Medicare claims to identify organizations that delivered primary care services (n = 56 ,287) and then linked organizations to program participation data and characteristics. Principal findings No program achieved more than 50% participation across the 56,287 organizations in a given year, and participation levels flattened or decreased in later years. 36% of organizations did not participate in any program over the eight-year study period; 50% participated in one; 13% in two; and 1% in all three. 14.31% of organizations participated in five or more years of Meaningful Use while 3.84% of organizations participated in five years of the MSSP ACO Program and 0.64% participated in at least five years of PCMH. Larger organizations, those with younger providers, those with more primary care providers, and those with larger Medicare patient panels were more likely to participate in more programs. Conclusions and relevance Primary care transformation via use of voluntary programs, each with their own participation requirements and approach to incentives, has failed to broadly engage primary care organizations. Those that have chosen to participate in multiple programs are likely those already providing high-quality care.

BACKGROUND The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM), a variant of the Delphi Method, was developed to synthesize existing evidence and elicit the clinical judgement of medical experts on the appropriate treatment of specific clinical presentations. Technological advances now allow researchers to conduct expert panels online, offering a cost-effective and convenient alternative to the traditional RAM. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs recently used a virtual RAM to validate clinical recommendations for de-intensifying routine primary care services. A substantial literature describes and tests various aspects of the traditional RAM in health research, yet we know comparatively less about how researchers implement online expert panels. OBJECTIVE The objectives of this study were twofold: 1) to understand how the virtual RAM process is currently used and reported in health research, and 2) to draw on our experience with the Assessing when to Stop or Scale back Unnecessary RoutinE Services (ASSURES) Study to provide preliminary reporting guidance for researchers to improve the transparency and reproducibility of reporting practices. METHODS The PubMed database was searched to identify studies published between 2009 and 2019 that used a virtual RAM to measure the appropriateness of medical care. Methodological data from each article was abstracted. The following categories were assessed: composition and characteristics of the online expert panels, characteristics of panel procedures, results, and panel satisfaction and engagement. RESULTS Of the 12 studies meeting the eligibility criteria and reviewed, only 42% (5/12) implemented the full RAM process with the remaining studies opting for a partial approach. Among those studies reporting, the median number of participants at first rating was 42. While 92% (11/12) of studies involved clinicians, 50% (6/12) involved multiple stakeholder types. Our review revealed that studies failed to report on critical aspects of the RAM process. For example, no studies reported response rates with the denominator of previous rounds, 42% (5/12) did not provide panelists with feedback between rating periods, 50% (6/12) either did not have or did not report on the panel discussion period, and 25% (3/12) did not report on quality measures to assess aspects of the panel process (e.g., satisfaction with the process). A self-assessment of the ASSURES study revealed implementation features, including panelist engagement and satisfaction, that were not recommended in earlier reviews of the RAM method, but nonetheless proved valuable for making mid-process adjustments. CONCLUSIONS In a post-COVID world, we anticipate that the virtual RAM will be an appealing option for researchers seeking a safe, efficient, and democratic process of expert agreement. Our literature review uncovered inconsistent reporting frameworks and insufficient detail to evaluate study outcomes. We provide preliminary recommendations for reporting that are both timely and important for producing replicable high-quality findings.

Background The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM), a variant of the Delphi Method, was developed to synthesize existing evidence and elicit the clinical judgement of medical experts on the appropriate treatment of specific clinical presentations. Technological advances now allow researchers to conduct expert panels on the internet, offering a cost-effective and convenient alternative to the traditional RAM. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs recently used a web-based RAM to validate clinical recommendations for de-intensifying routine primary care services. A substantial literature describes and tests various aspects of the traditional RAM in health research; yet we know comparatively less about how researchers implement web-based expert panels. Objective The objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to understand how the web-based RAM process is currently used and reported in health research and (2) to provide preliminary reporting guidance for researchers to improve the transparency and reproducibility of reporting practices. Methods The PubMed database was searched to identify studies published between 2009 and 2019 that used a web-based RAM to measure the appropriateness of medical care. Methodological data from each article were abstracted. The following categories were assessed: composition and characteristics of the web-based expert panels, characteristics of panel procedures, results, and panel satisfaction and engagement. Results Of the 12 studies meeting the eligibility criteria and reviewed, only 42% (5/12) implemented the full RAM process with the remaining studies opting for a partial approach. Among those studies reporting, the median number of participants at first rating was 42. While 92% (11/12) of studies involved clinicians, 50% (6/12) involved multiple stakeholder types. Our review revealed that the studies failed to report on critical aspects of the RAM process. For example, no studies reported response rates with the denominator of previous rounds, 42% (5/12) did not provide panelists with feedback between rating periods, 50% (6/12) either did not have or did not report on the panel discussion period, and 25% (3/12) did not report on quality measures to assess aspects of the panel process (eg, satisfaction with the process). Conclusions Conducting web-based RAM panels will continue to be an appealing option for researchers seeking a safe, efficient, and democratic process of expert agreement. Our literature review uncovered inconsistent reporting frameworks and insufficient detail to evaluate study outcomes. We provide preliminary recommendations for reporting that are both timely and important for producing replicable, high-quality findings. The need for reporting standards is especially critical given that more people may prefer to participate in web-based rather than in-person panels due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Nearly half of hospitalized patients with bacteriuria or treated for pneumonia receive unnecessary antibiotics (noninfectious or nonbacterial syndrome such as asymptomatic bacteriuria), excess duration (antibiotics prescribed for longer than necessary), or avoidable fluoroquinolones (safer alternative available) at hospital discharge.1–3 However, whether antibiotic overuse at discharge varies between hospitals or is associated with patient outcomes remains unknown. Methods: From July 2017 to December 2018, trained abstractors at 46 Michigan hospitals collected detailed data on a sample of adult, non–intensive care, hospitalized patients with bacteriuria (positive urine culture with or without symptoms) or treated for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP; includes those with the disease formerly known as healthcare-associated pneumonia [HCAP]). Antibiotic prescriptions at discharge were assessed for antibiotic overuse using a previously described, guideline-based hierarchical algorithm.3 Here, we report the proportion of patients discharged with antibiotic overuse by the hospital. We also assessed hospital-level correlation (using Pearson’s correlation coefficient) between antibiotic overuse at discharge for patients with bacteriuria and patients treated for CAP. Finally, we assessed the association of antibiotic overuse at discharge with patient outcomes (mortality, readmission, emergency department visit, and antibiotic-associated adverse events) at 30 days using logit generalized estimating equations adjusted for patient characteristics and probability of treatment. Results: Of 17,081 patients (7,207 with bacteriuria; 9,874 treated for pneumonia), nearly half (42.2%) had antibiotic overuse at discharge (36.3% bacteriuria and 51.1% pneumonia). The percentage of patients discharged with antibiotic overuse varied 5-fold among hospitals from 14.7% (95% CI, 8.0%–25.3%) to 74.3% (95% CI, 64.2%–83.8%). Hospital rates of antibiotic overuse at discharge were strongly correlated between bacteriuria and CAP (Pearson’s correlation coefficient, 0.76; P ≤ .001) (Fig. 1). In adjusted analyses, antibiotic overuse at discharge was not associated with death, readmission, emergency department visit, or Clostridioides difficile infection. However, each day of overuse was associated with a 5% increase in the odds of patient-reported antibiotic-associated adverse events after discharge (Fig. 2). Conclusions: Antibiotic overuse at discharge was common, varied widely between hospitals, and was associated with patient harm. Furthermore, antibiotic overuse at discharge was strongly correlated between 2 disparate diseases, suggesting that prescribing culture or discharge processes—rather than disease-specific factors—contribute to overprescribing at discharge. Thus, discharge stewardship may be needed to target multiple diseases.Funding: This study was supported by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network.Disclosures: Valerie M. Vaughn reports contracted research for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan, the Department of VA, the NIH, the SHEA, and the APIC. She also reports receipt of funds from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation Speaker’s Bureau, the CDC, the Pew Research Trust, Sepsis Alliance, and the Hospital and Health System Association of Pennsylvania.

To describe MiPATH (the Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in pregnancy) panel process and key recommendations for prenatal care delivery.We conducted an appropriateness study using the RAND Corporation and University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, a modified e-Delphi process, to develop MiPATH recommendations using sequential steps: 1) definition and scope of key terms, 2) literature review and data synthesis, 3) case scenario development, 4) panel selection and scenario revisions, and 5) two rounds of panel appropriateness ratings with deliberation. Recommendations were developed for average-risk pregnant individuals (eg, individuals not requiring care by maternal-fetal medicine specialists). Because prenatal services (eg, laboratory tests, vaccinations) have robust evidence, panelists considered only how services are delivered (eg, visit frequency, telemedicine).The appropriateness of key aspects of prenatal care delivery across individuals with and without common medical and pregnancy complications, as well as social and structural determinants of health, was determined by the panel. Panelists agreed that a risk assessment for medical, social, and structural determinants of health should be completed as soon as individuals present for care. Additionally, the panel provided recommendations for: 1) prenatal visit schedules (care initiation, visit timing and frequency, routine pregnancy assessments), 2) integration of telemedicine (virtual visits and home devices), and 3) care individualization. Panelists recognized significant gaps in existing evidence and the need for policy changes to support equitable care with changing practices.The MiPATH recommendations offer more flexible prenatal care delivery for average-risk individuals.

OBJECTIVES: Vascular access device decision-making for pediatric patients remains a complex, highly variable process. To date, evidence-based criteria to inform these choices do not exist. The objective of the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters in pediatrics (miniMAGIC) was to provide guidance on device selection, device characteristics, and insertion technique for clinicians, balancing and contextualizing evidence with current practice through a multidisciplinary panel of experts. METHODS: The RAND Corporation and University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method was used to develop miniMAGIC, which included the following sequential phases: definition of scope and key terms, information synthesis and literature review, expert multidisciplinary panel selection and engagement, case scenario development, and appropriateness ratings by an expert panel via 2 rounds. RESULTS: The appropriateness of the selection, characteristics, and insertion technique of intravenous catheters commonly used in pediatric health care across age populations (neonates, infants, children, and adolescents), settings, diagnoses, clinical indications, insertion locations, and vessel visualization devices and techniques was defined. Core concepts including vessel preservation, insertion and postinsertion harm minimization (eg, infection, thrombosis), undisrupted treatment provision, and inclusion of patient preferences were emphasized. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we provide evidence-based criteria for intravenous catheter selection (from umbilical catheters to totally implanted venous devices) in pediatric patients across a range of clinical indications. miniMAGIC also highlights core vascular access practices in need of collaborative research and innovation.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the methodology undertaken to provide guidance on the appropriateness, as well as inappropriateness, of vascular access device selection, characteristics, and insertion technique for pediatric patients. METHODS: The RAND Corporation–University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method was used. After definition of key terms and scope, a systematic review of the pediatric vascular access literature was undertaken. Clinical scenarios were developed to reflect the common indications for vascular access across pediatric health care. These were sectioned according to (1) device selection, (2) device characteristics, and (3) insertion technique. An interdisciplinary panel of experts (N = 14) consisting of leading experts representing diverse pediatric clinical disciplines including anesthesiology, cardiology and cardiac surgery, critical care and emergency, general surgery, hematology and oncology, hospital medicine, infectious disease, interventional radiology, pharmacology, regional pediatric hospitalist, and vascular access nursing specialties was convened. The scenarios were rated for appropriateness by the panel over 2 rounds (1 [highly inappropriate] to 9 [highly appropriate]). Round 1 ratings were completed anonymously and independently by panel members and classified into 3 levels of appropriateness: appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate, or disagreement. For round 2, panelists met in-person to discuss the round 1 ratings and independently rerated the indications. All indications were reclassified into 3 levels of appropriateness or disagreement. CONCLUSIONS: The RAND Corporation–University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method provides a rigorous, in-depth and transparent methodology to develop the first appropriateness criteria for the selection of pediatric vascular access devices in a range of patient groups.

In a 2016 survey of 46 Michigan hospitals, we identified four key needs for antibiotic stewardship: clinically-relevant antibiotic data, monitoring compliance, syndrome-specific interventions, and discharge stewardship. A stewardship initiative now addresses these needs within the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium.

To formally assess the appropriateness of different timings of urethral catheter removal after transurethral prostate resection or ablation. Although urethral catheter placement is routine after this common treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), no guidelines inform duration of catheter use.RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methodology.Using a standardized, multiround rating process (ie, the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methodology), an 11-member multidisciplinary panel reviewed a literature summary and rated clinical scenarios for urethral catheter duration after transurethral prostate surgery for BPH as appropriate (ie, benefits outweigh risks), inappropriate, or of uncertain appropriateness. We examined appropriateness across 4 clinical scenarios (no preexisting catheter, preexisting catheter [including intermittent], difficult catheter placement, significant perforation) and 5 durations (postoperative day [POD] 0, 1, 2, 3-6, or ≥7).Urethral catheter removal and first trial of void on POD 1 was rated appropriate for all scenarios except clinically significant perforations. In this case, waiting until POD 3 was deemed the earliest appropriate timing. Waiting 3 or more days to remove the catheter for patients with or without preexisting catheter needs, or for those with difficult catheter placement in the operating room, was rated as inappropriate.We defined clinically relevant guidance statements for the appropriateness of urethral catheter duration after transurethral prostate surgery. Given the lack of guidelines and this robust expert panel approach, these ratings may help clinicians and healthcare systems improve the consistency and quality of care for patients undergoing transurethral surgery for BPH.

BackgroundIndwelling urinary catheters are commonly used for patients undergoing general and orthopaedic surgery. Despite infectious and non-infectious harms of urinary catheters, there is limited guidance available to surgery teams regarding appropriate perioperative catheter use.ObjectiveUsing the RAND Corporation/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) Appropriateness Method, we assessed the appropriateness of indwelling urinary catheter placement and different timings of catheter removal for routine general and orthopaedic surgery procedures.MethodsTwo multidisciplinary panels consisting of 13 and 11 members (physicians and nurses) for general and orthopaedic surgery, respectively, reviewed the available literature regarding the impact of different perioperative catheter use strategies. Using a standardised, multiround rating process, the panels independently rated clinical scenarios (91 general surgery, 36 orthopaedic surgery) for urinary catheter placement and postoperative duration of use as appropriate (ie, benefits outweigh risks), inappropriate or of uncertain appropriateness.ResultsAppropriateness of catheter use varied by procedure, accounting for procedure-specific risks as well as expected procedure time and intravenous fluids. Procedural appropriateness ratings for catheters were summarised for clinical use into three groups: (1) can perform surgery without catheter; (2) use intraoperatively only, ideally remove before leaving the operating room; and (3) use intraoperatively and keep catheter until postoperative days 1–4. Specific recommendations were provided by procedure, with postoperative day 1 being appropriate for catheter removal for first voiding trial for many procedures.ConclusionWe defined the appropriateness of indwelling urinary catheter use during and after common general and orthopaedic surgical procedures. These ratings may help reduce catheter-associated complications for patients undergoing these procedures.

Background The guidelines for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) recommend avoiding insertion if the anticipated duration of use is =5 days. However, short-term PICC use is common in hospitals. We sought to identify patient, provider, and device characteristics and the clinical outcomes associated with short-term PICCs. Methods Between January 2014 and June 2016, trained abstractors at 52 Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety (HMS) Consortium sites collected data from medical records of adults that received PICCs during hospitalization. Patients were prospectively followed until PICC removal, death, or 70 days after insertion. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to identify factors associated with short-term PICCs, defined as dwell time of =5 days. Complications associated with short-term use, including major (eg, venous thromboembolism [VTE] or central lineassociated bloodstream infection [CLABSI]) or minor (eg, catheter occlusion, tip migration) events were assessed. Results Of the 15,397 PICCs placed, 3902 (25.3%) had a dwell time of =5 days. Most (95.5%) short-term PICCs were removed during hospitalization. Compared to PICCs placed for >5 days, variables associated with short-term PICCs included difficult venous access (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40-1.69), multilumen devices (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.39-1.69), and teaching hospitals (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.52). Among those with short-term PICCs, 374 (9.6%) experienced a complication, including 99 (2.5%) experiencing VTE and 17 (0.4%) experiencing CLABSI events. The most common minor complications were catheter occlusion (4%) and tip migration (2.2%). Conclusion Short-term use of PICCs is common and associated with patient, provider, and device factors. As PICC placement, even for brief periods, is associated with complications, efforts targeted at factors underlying such use appear necessary.

Essentials How best to quantify thrombosis risk with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) is unknown. Data from a registry were used to develop the Michigan Risk Score (MRS) for PICC thrombosis. Five risk factors were associated with PICC thrombosis and used to develop a risk score. MRS was predictive of the risk of PICC thrombosis and can be useful in clinical practice. SummaryBackground Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are associated with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We developed a score to predict risk of PICC-related thrombosis. Methods Using data from the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium, image-confirmed upper-extremity DVT cases were identified. A logistic, mixed-effects model with hospital-specific random intercepts was used to identify factors associated with PICC-DVT. Points were assigned to each predictor, stratifying patients into four classes of risk. Internal validation was performed by bootstrapping with assessment of calibration and discrimination of the model. Results Of 23 010 patients who received PICCs, 475 (2.1%) developed symptomatic PICC-DVT. Risk factors associated with PICC-DVT included: history of DVT; multi-lumen PICC; active cancer; presence of another CVC when the PICC was placed; and white blood cell count greater than 12 000. Four risk classes were created based on thrombosis risk. Thrombosis rates were 0.9% for class I, 1.6% for class II, 2.7% for class III and 4.7% for class IV, with marginal predicted probabilities of 0.9% (0.7, 1.2), 1.5% (1.2, 1.9), 2.6% (2.2, 3.0) and 4.5% (3.7, 5.4) for classes I, II, III, and IV, respectively. The risk classification rule was strongly associated with PICC-DVT, with odds ratios of 1.68 (95% CI, 1.19, 2.37), 2.90 (95% CI, 2.09, 4.01) and 5.20 (95% CI, 3.65, 7.42) for risk classes II, III and IV vs. risk class I, respectively. Conclusion The Michigan PICC-DVT Risk Score offers a novel way to estimate risk of DVT associated with PICCs and can help inform appropriateness of PICC insertion.

The adoption of active surveillance varies widely across urological communities, which suggests a need for more consistency in the counseling of patients. To address this need we used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop appropriateness criteria and counseling statements for active surveillance.Panelists were recruited from MUSIC urology practices. Combinations of parameters thought to influence decision making were used to create and score 160 theoretical clinical scenarios for appropriateness of active surveillance. Recent rates of active surveillance among real patients across the state were assessed using the MUSIC registry.Low volume Gleason 6 was deemed highly appropriate for active surveillance whereas high volume Gleason 6 and low volume Gleason 3+4 were deemed appropriate to uncertain. No scenario was deemed inappropriate or highly inappropriate. Prostate specific antigen density, race and life expectancy impacted scores for intermediate and high volume Gleason 6 and low volume Gleason 3+4. The greatest degree of score dispersion (disagreement) occurred in scenarios with long life expectancy, high volume Gleason 6 and low volume Gleason 3+4. Recent rates of active surveillance use among real patients ranged from 0% to 100% at the provider level for low or intermediate biopsy volume Gleason 6, demonstrating a clear opportunity for quality improvement.By virtue of this work urologists have the opportunity to present specific recommendations from the panel to their individual patients. Community-wide efforts aimed at increasing rates of active surveillance and reducing practice and physician level variation in the choice of active surveillance vs treatment are warranted.

Background The optimal approach to assess risk of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized medical patients is unknown. We examined how well the Caprini risk assessment model predicts venous thromboembolism in hospitalized medical patients. Methods Between January 2011 and March 2014, venous thromboembolism events and risk factors were collected from non-intensive care unit medical patients hospitalized in facilities across Michigan. After calculation of the Caprini score for each patient, mixed logistic spline regression was used to determine the predicted probabilities of 90-day venous thromboembolism by receipt of pharmacologic prophylaxis across the Caprini risk continuum. Results A total of 670 (1.05%) of 63,548 eligible patients experienced a venous thromboembolism event within 90 days of hospital admission. The mean Caprini risk score was 4.94 (range, 0-28). Predictive modeling revealed a consistent linear increase in venous thromboembolism for Caprini scores between 1 and 10; estimates beyond a score of 10 were unstable. Receipt of pharmacologic prophylaxis resulted in a modest decrease in venous thromboembolism risk (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.99; P = .04). However, the low overall incidence of venous thromboembolism led to large estimates of numbers needed to treat to prevent a single venous thromboembolism event. A Caprini cut-point demonstrating clear benefit of prophylaxis was not detected. Conclusions Although a linear association between the Caprini risk assessment model and the risk of venous thromboembolism was noted, an extremely low incidence of venous thromboembolism events in non-intensive care unit medical patients was observed. The Caprini risk assessment model was unable to identify a subset of medical patients who benefit from pharmacologic prophylaxis.

Healthcare delivery system reform has become a dominant topic of conversation throughout the United States. Driven in part by ever-higher national expenditures on health, an increasing number of payers and provider organizations are working to reduce the costs and improve the quality of healthcare. In this article, we demystify the term "Population Health," review some of the larger payer initiatives currently in effect and discuss specific provider group efforts to improve the quality and cost of healthcare for patients.

Importance Much of health care involves established, routine use of medical services for chronic conditions or prevention. Stopping these services when the evidence changes or if the benefits no longer outweigh the risks is essential. Yet, most guidelines focus on escalating care and provide few explicit recommendations to stop or scale back (ie, deintensify) treatment and testing. Objective To develop a systematic, transparent, and reproducible approach for identifying, specifying, and validating deintensification recommendations associated with routine adult primary care. Design, Setting, and Participants A focused review of existing guidelines and recommendations was completed to identify and prioritize potential deintensification indications. Then, 2 modified virtual Delphi expert panels examined the synthesized evidence, suggested ways that the candidate recommendations could be improved, and assessed the validity of the recommendations using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Twenty-five physicians from Veterans Affairs and US academic institutions with knowledge in relevant clinical areas (eg, geriatrics, primary care, women’s health, cardiology, and endocrinology) served as panel members. Main Outcomes and Measures Validity of the recommendations, defined as high-quality evidence that deintensification is likely to improve patient outcomes, evidence that intense testing and/or treatment could cause harm in some patients, absence of evidence on the benefit of continued or repeated intense treatment or testing, and evidence that deintensification is consistent with high-quality care. Results A total of 409 individual recommendations were identified representing 178 unique opportunities to stop or scale back routine services (eg, stopping population-based screening for vitamin D deficiency and decreasing concurrent use of opioids and benzodiazepines). Thirty-seven recommendations were prioritized and forwarded to the expert panels. Panelists reviewed the evidence and suggested modifications, resulting in 44 recommendations being rated. Overall, 37 recommendations (84%) were considered to be valid, as assessed by the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, a total of 178 unique opportunities to deintensify routine primary care services were identified, and 37 of these were validated as high-priority deintensification recommendations. To date, this is the first study to develop a model for identifying, specifying, and validating deintensification recommendations that can be implemented and tracked in clinical practice.

To switch patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) from costlier 5-aminosalicylic acid compounds to sulfasalazine and assess (1) the cost savings, (2) the barriers to switching, and (3) adverse events (AEs) and adherence at 3 months after the drug switch.An open-label, pharmacist-administered drug switch program coordinated at an academic inflammatory bowel disease center.A clinical pharmacist contacted patients with UC who were prescreened by physicians and covered by specific insurers to enroll them in the drug switch program. Enrolled patients were followed for 3 months to assess AEs and medication adherence. Reasons for declining to participate were recorded.A total of 205 eligible patients were identified; only 14 enrolled, and 10 remained on sulfasalazine for the entire 3-month follow-up period. The enrollment rate was only 4.9%, yet a net cost savings of $22,828/3-month to the insurer was achieved (including program administration costs but excluding AE costs), with co-pays reduced by approximately $25 per month per patient. The rate of AEs on sulfasalazine (28.6%) was similar to that found in previous reports. Significant unanticipated barriers to switching were encountered, namely patient desire to not alter an existing effective drug regimen.A pharmacist-administered drug switch program in patients with UC was significantly more difficult than anticipated, with questionable achievement of cost savings. This experience suggests that future drug switches and studies should focus on patient preferences for drug switching, as this may have implications for switching from brand name to biosimilar drugs.

Background Fluoroquinolones increase the risk of Clostridioides difficile infection and antibiotic resistance, but are frequently used for hospitalized patients with bacteriuria. We assessed patterns and predictors of inappropriate fluoroquinolone (FQ) use among hospitalized patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) and cystitis. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of non-ICU medicine patients with ASB or cystitis (complicated or uncomplicated) from January 2018 to March 2019 at 43 Michigan hospitals. Patients with concomitant infections, bacteremia, or pyelonephritis were excluded. Each day of FQ (ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin) use (inpatient and post discharge) was assessed for appropriateness. FQ use was inappropriate if: (A) ASB, (B) urine culture with an FQ-resistant bacteria, (C) a safer alternative empiric or definitive antibiotic (treatment ≥2 days after urine culture collection) based on disease severity, cultures, allergies, and renal function, or (D) excess duration (>7 days complicated cystitis; >3 days uncomplicated cystitis). Hospitals were also surveyed on existing stewardship (ASP) practices targeting FQ use. ASP practices associated with inappropriate FQ use were evaluated using logistic generalized estimated equation models adjusting for patient factors and hospital clustering. Results Of 4849 included patients with ASB (39.7%) or cystitis (60.3%), 21.9% (n = 1,061) received an FQ and 92.7% (n = 984) received a, FQ inappropriately (Figure 1). Of 5,465 FQ days of therapy (DOT), 90.7% (n = 4,959) were inappropriate. Definitive treatment of complicated cystitis led to the greatest proportion of inappropriate FQ DOTs (50.6%), followed by ASB (36.4%) (Table 1). Hospitals varied (Figure 2), but those with cascade reporting of antibiotic susceptibilities, urinary tract infection (UTI) treatment guideline or an ASP performing prospective audit and feedback on FQ use had lower inappropriate FQ treatment rates (Table 2). Conclusion Hospitalized patients with ASB and cystitis often receive an FQ. Most FQ use is inappropriate due to ASB treatment or FQ use for complicated cystitis despite the option of an alternative antibiotic. Prospective audit and feedback, UTI guidelines, and cascade reporting of antibiotic susceptibilities can be used by ASP to reduce inappropriate FQ use. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Background Antibiotics prescribed at hospital discharge account for half of antibiotic use related to hospitalization for urinary tract infection or bacterial pneumonia. It is unclear how much antibiotic use at discharge represents overuse, and thus, could potentially be improved through antibiotic stewardship. Methods From July 2017 to December 2018, trained abstractors at 46 Michigan hospitals collected detailed data on a sample of adult, nonintensive care, hospitalized patients with bacteriuria or treated for community-acquired or healthcare-associated pneumonia (discharge diagnosis of pneumonia plus antibiotic treatment). Antibiotic prescriptions at discharge were assessed for overuse using a guideline-based hierarchical algorithm: evaluating first for unnecessary antibiotics (noninfectious/nonbacterial syndrome), then excess duration (antibiotics needed, but prescribed for longer than necessary), and finally avoidable fluoroquinolones (safer alternative antibiotic available) (Figure 1). For each disease state, descriptive results are shown with comparisons by t- or Fisher’s exact tests. Results Of 17,157 patients (7,283 with bacteriuria; 9,874 treated for pneumonia), 30.1% of patients with bacteriuria had asymptomatic bacteriuria and 11.4% of patients treated for pneumonia did not meet diagnostic criteria for pneumonia. The most common antibiotics prescribed at discharge were fluoroquinolones. Nearly half (43.6%) of patients had antibiotic overuse at discharge (33.8% bacteriuria, 50.9% pneumonia), with a median 4 days of overuse after discharge (Table 1). For bacteriuria, 45.0% of overuse days at discharge were due to unnecessary antibiotics; for pneumonia, 61.2% were due to excess antibiotic duration (Figure 2). Patients with community-acquired pneumonia and those with sepsis on admission had the highest rates of antibiotic overuse at discharge (Table 2). Conclusion In the largest assessment of antibiotics at discharge to-date, antibiotic overuse at discharge was extremely common. Specific targets for discharge stewardship vary by disease state. Notably, interventions may be more effective at reducing fluoroquinolone prescribing at discharge indirectly by stopping treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria and reducing excess duration in pneumonia. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

Use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has grown substantially in recent years. Increasing use has led to the realization that PICCs are associated with important complications, including thrombosis and infection. Moreover, some PICCs may not be placed for clinically valid reasons. Defining appropriate indications for insertion, maintenance, and care of PICCs is thus important for patient safety. An international panel was convened that applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop criteria for use of PICCs. After systematic reviews of the literature, scenarios related to PICC use, care, and maintenance were developed according to patient population (for example, general hospitalized, critically ill, cancer, kidney disease), indication for insertion (infusion of peripherally compatible infusates vs. vesicants), and duration of use (≤5 days, 6 to 14 days, 15 to 30 days, or ≥31 days). Within each scenario, appropriateness of PICC use was compared with that of other venous access devices. After review of 665 scenarios, 253 (38%) were rated as appropriate, 124 (19%) as neutral/uncertain, and 288 (43%) as inappropriate. For peripherally compatible infusions, PICC use was rated as inappropriate when the proposed duration of use was 5 or fewer days. Midline catheters and ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheters were preferred to PICCs for use between 6 and 14 days. In critically ill patients, nontunneled central venous catheters were preferred over PICCs when 14 or fewer days of use were likely. In patients with cancer, PICCs were rated as appropriate for irritant or vesicant infusion, regardless of duration. The panel of experts used a validated method to develop appropriate indications for PICC use across patient populations. These criteria can be used to improve care, inform quality improvement efforts, and advance the safety of medical patients.

Interventions to reduce urinary catheter use involve lists of "appropriate" indications developed from limited evidence without substantial multidisciplinary input. Implementing these lists, however, is challenging given broad interpretation of indications, such as "critical illness." To refine criteria for appropriate catheter use-defined as use in which benefits outweigh risks-the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was applied. After reviewing the literature, a 15-member multidisciplinary panel of physicians, nurses, and specialists in infection prevention rated scenarios for catheter use as appropriate, inappropriate, or of uncertain appropriateness by using a standardized, multiround rating process. The appropriateness of Foley catheters, intermittent straight catheters (ISCs), and external condom catheters for hospitalized adults on medical services was assessed in 299 scenarios, including urinary retention, incontinence, wounds, urine volume measurement, urine sample collection, and comfort. The scenarios included patient-specific issues, such as difficulty turning and catheter placement challenges. The panel rated 105 Foley scenarios (43 appropriate, 48 inappropriate, 14 uncertain), 97 ISC scenarios (15 appropriate, 66 inappropriate, 16 uncertain), and 97 external catheter scenarios (30 appropriate, 51 inappropriate, 16 uncertain). The refined criteria clarify that Foley catheters are appropriate for measuring and collecting urine only when fluid status or urine cannot be assessed by other means; specify that patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) need specific medical indications for catheters because ICU location alone is not an appropriate indication; and recognize that Foley and external catheters may be pragmatically appropriate to manage urinary incontinence in select patients. These new appropriateness criteria can inform large-scale collaborative and bedside efforts to reduce inappropriate urinary catheter use.

Objectives. To examine state-level associations between voting patterns and adolescent coverage for at least 1 dose of human papillomavirus (HPV), tetanus-containing (Tdap), and meningococcal (MCV4) vaccination. Methods. We classified states as “blue” (Democratic affiliation) or “red” (Republican affiliation) based on the Presidential election results in 2012. We used multivariable models to adjust for potential confounding by sociodemographic and health care access characteristics and vaccination policies. For HPV, separate models were fitted for boys and girls. Results. Adolescent vaccination coverage was significantly higher in blue states than red states for each vaccine (P Conclusions. State-level voting patterns are independently and significantly associated with coverage for routinely recommended adolescent vaccines. These differences may reflect population-level differences in cultural norms and social values. Public Health Implications. Strategies to increase coverage at the individual, community, or structural level should consider local political settings that may facilitate or hinder effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES: In 2009 and 2010, 17 primary care sites within 1 healthcare system became patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs), but the sites trained different personnel (pharmacists vs nurses) to improve diabetes care using self-management support (SMS). We report the challenges and successes of our efforts to: 1) assemble a new multipayer (Medicare, Medicaid, commercial) claims dataset linked to a clinical registry, and 2) use the new dataset to perform comparative effectiveness research on implementation of the 2 SMS models. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. METHODS: We lost permission to use private-payer data. Therefore, we used claims from Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible patients, merged with chronic disease registry data. We studied 2008 to 2010, which included 1 year pre- and 1 year post the 2009 implementation time period. Outcomes were outpatient and emergency department visits, hospitalizations, care process (use of statin), and 3 intermediate outcomes (glycemic control, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein [LDL]). RESULTS: In our sample of 2826 patients, quality of care improved and utilization decreased over the 2.5 years. Both approaches improved lipid control (LDL decreased by an average of 4 mg/dL for pharmacy-SMS and 5.6 mg/dL for nurse-SMS) and diastolic blood pressure (–1.5 mm Hg for pharmacy-SMS and –1.3 mm Hg for nurse-SMS), whereas only the pharmacy-led approach decreased primary care visits (by 0.8 visits). The groups differed slightly on 2 measures (glycated hemoglobin, systolic blood pressure) with respect to the trajectory of improvement over time, but performance was similar by 2.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes care improved during PCMH implementation systemwide, supporting both nurse-led and pharmacist-led SMS models.

Catheter exchange over a guidewire is frequently performed for malfunctioning peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). Whether such exchanges are associated with venous thromboembolism is not known.We performed a retrospective cohort study to assess the association between PICC exchange and risk of thromboembolism. Adult hospitalized patients that received a PICC during clinical care at one of 51 hospitals participating in the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety consortium were included. The primary outcome was hazard of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (radiographically confirmed upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) in those that underwent PICC exchange vs those that did not.Of 23,010 patients that underwent PICC insertion in the study, 589 patients (2.6%) experienced a PICC exchange. Almost half of all exchanges were performed for catheter dislodgement or occlusion. A total of 480 patients (2.1%) experienced PICC-associated deep vein thrombosis. The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was greater in those that underwent PICC exchange vs those that did not (3.6% vs 2.0%, P .001). Median time to thrombosis was shorter among those that underwent exchange vs those that did not (5 vs 11 days, P = .02). Following adjustment, PICC exchange was independently associated with twofold greater risk of thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-2.85) vs no exchange. The effect size of PICC exchange on thrombosis was second in magnitude to device lumens (HR 2.06; 95% CI, 1.59-2.66 and HR 2.31; 95% CI, 1.6-3.33 for double- and triple-lumen devices, respectively).Guidewire exchange of PICCs may be associated with increased risk of thrombosis. As some exchanges may be preventable, consideration of risks and benefits of exchanges in clinical practice is needed.

Background Existing guidelines, including Choosing Wisely recommendations, endorse avoiding placement of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Objective To describe the frequency of and characteristics associated with PICC use in hospitalized patients with stage 3b or greater CKD (glomerular filtration rate [GFR]

Background:Patient self-care support via Interactive Voice Response (IVR) can improve disease management. However, little is known about the factors affecting program engagement.Methods:We compiled data on IVR program engagement for 1173 patients with: heart failure, depression, diabetes, or cancer

Mechanisms of red blood cell delivery and their contribution to the incidence of venous thromboembolism are not well understood in the clinical setting. We assessed whether red blood cell transfusion through peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) affects the risk of venous thromboembolism compared with transfusion through non-PICC devices.We implemented a prospective study between Jan 1, 2013, and Sept 12, 2015, in patients (age ≥18 years) admitted to a general medicine ward or intensive care unit who received a PICC for any reason during clinical care in 47 hospitals in Michigan, USA, with a maximum follow-up of 70 days. The exposure of interest was route of red blood cell transfusion. The primary outcome was symptomatic, radiographically confirmed, deep-vein thrombosis in the arm or leg or pulmonary embolism. We used Cox proportional hazards regression for analyses.Venous thromboembolism developed in 482 (5%) of 10 604 patients with PICCs. Of 788 patients who received a red blood cell transfusion through a multi-lumen PICC, 61 had venous thromboembolism. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for venous thromboembolism in all patients whose transfusions were administered through a multi-lumen PICC was 1·96 (95% CI 1·47-2·61; p0·0001) compared with patients not receiving a transfusion, and was 1·79 (1·09-2·95; p=0·022) compared with patients transfused through a peripheral intravenous line. Compared with delivery through a peripheral intravenous line, venous thromboembolism risk was not elevated if transfusions were delivered through a single-lumen PICC (HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·44-2·14; p=0·95) or central venous catheter (1·50, 0·77-2·91; p=0·23). For every red blood cell unit transfused through a PICC, there was a significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism (adjusted HR 1·24, 95% CI 1·01-1·52; p=0·037). Patients who received a transfusion through a PICC in the left arm were significantly more likely to develop a deep-vein thrombosis in the ipsilateral arm compared with the contralateral side (HR 23·44, 95% CI 2·96-185·83; p=0·0028). Similarly, patients transfused through a right-sided PICC were more likely to develop deep-vein thrombosis in the ipsilateral arm (HR 3·37, 95% CI 1·02-11·14; p=0·047).Red blood cell delivery through a multi-lumen PICC is associated with a greater risk of thrombosis than transfusion through a peripheral intravenous catheter. Careful monitoring for venous thromboembolism when transfusing red blood cells through multi-lumen PICCs seems necessary.Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network, as part of the BCBSM Value Partnerships program.

Background and aim A major challenge in conducting clinical trials/studies is the timely recruitment of eligible subjects. Our aim is to develop a Diabetes Research Registry (DRR) to facilitate recruitment by matching potential subjects interested in research with approved clinical studies using study entry criteria abstracted from their electronic health records (EHR). Method A committee with expertise in diabetes, quality improvement, information technology, and informatics designed and developed the DRR. Using a hybrid approach, we identified and consented patients interested in research, abstracted their EHRs to assess common eligibility criteria, and contacted them about their interest in participating in specific studies. Investigators submit their requests with study entry criteria to the DRR which then provides a list of potential subjects who may be directly contacted for their study. The DRR meets all local, regional and federal regulatory requirements. Results After 5 years, the DRR has over 5000 registrants. About 30% have type 1 diabetes and 70% have type 2 diabetes. There are almost equal proportions of men and women. During this period, 31 unique clinical studies from 19 unique investigators requested lists of potential subjects for their studies. Eleven grant applications from 10 unique investigators used aggregated counts of potentially eligible subjects in their applications. Conclusion The DRR matches potential subjects interested in research with approved clinical studies using study entry criteria abstracted from their EHR. By providing large lists of potentially eligible study subjects quickly, the DRR facilitated recruitment in 31 clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE The goals of this study were to examine trajectories of blood pressure (BP) in adults with diabetes and investigate the association of trajectory patterns with mortality. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A nonconcurrent longitudinal design was used to monitor 3,766 Medicare patients with diabetes from 2005 through 2008. Data were extracted from a registry of Medicare beneficiaries, which was developed by a large academic practice that participated in the Physician Group Practice Medicare Demonstration. The relationship between BP trajectories and all-cause mortality was modeled using multilevel mixed-effects linear regression. RESULTS During the 4-year study period, 10.7% of the patients died, half of whom were aged ≥75 years. The crude and adjusted models both showed a greater decline in systolic and diastolic BP in patients who died than in those who did not die. In a model adjusted for age, sex, race, medications, and comorbidities, the mean systolic BP decreased by 3.2 mmHg/year (P < 0.001) in the years before death and by 0.7 mmHg/year (P < 0.001) in those who did not die (P < 0.001 for the difference in slopes). Similarly, diastolic BP declined by 1.3 mmHg/year for those who died (P < 0.001) and by 0.6 mmHg/year for those who did not die (P < 0.001); the difference in slopes was significant (P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS Systolic and diastolic BP both declined more rapidly in the 4 years before death than in patients who remained alive.

The purpose was to assess the clinical utility of diagnostic tests for identifying malignancy within a solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN), and to create a nomogram or "look-up" table using clinical data and non-invasive radiology (positive) test results to estimate post-test probability of malignancy. Studies that examined computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for the evaluation of SPN. Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed study quality. Study-specific and overall positive likelihood ratios (LRs) for each diagnostic test confirming a diagnosis of malignancy and negative LR for each diagnostic test excluding a diagnosis of malignancy within an SPN were calculated. Forty-four of 242 articles were included. Positive LRs for diagnostic tests were: CT 3.91 (95% confidence interval 2.42, 5.40), MRI 4.57 (3.03, 6.1), PET 5.44 (3.56, 7.32) and SPECT 5.16 (4.03, 6.30). Negative LRs were: CT 0.10 (0.03, 0.16), MRI 0.08 (0.03, 0.12), PET 0.06 (0.02, 0.09) and SPECT 0.06 (0.04, 0.08). Differences in performance for all tests were negligible; therefore, the clinician may confidently use any of the four tests presented in further evaluating an SPN. Given the low cost and prevalence of the technology, SPECT appears to be the leading choice for additional testing in SPN evaluation.

OBJECTIVE Optimal blood pressure (BP) control in patients with diabetes poses a challenge in primary care clinics because of the complexity of the disease and competing patient care demands. We used a multidisciplinary team to standardize and improve hypertension care for patients with diabetes by implementing a visual and action-oriented high BP prompt, collaborative practice agreement, medication intensification protocol, and home BP monitoring machine loan program. DESIGN Prospective, pre-/poststudy. SETTING General medicine clinic affiliated with a large academic healthcare system. PATIENTS Two hundred sixty-three patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. RESULTS Hypertension control (ie, BP < 135/80 mm Hg) in patients with diabetes improved from 53.6% to 69.3% (P < .001) after implementing a standardized BP assessment and treatment process. There was also a significant decrease of 4 mm Hg in both the mean systolic and diastolic BPs after the intervention. The improvement in BP control was associated with an increase in the average number of antihypertensive medications from 1.56 to 1.93. CONCLUSIONS The use of a process-oriented clinical redesign and a multidisciplinary team approach resulted in improved BP management in patients with diabetes in a primary care setting.

RISING HEALTHCARE COSTS, increasing numbers of patients with chronic illnesses, an aging population, and a healthcare delivery system failing to meet the needs of its people - this could describe American medicine in the 1980s and 1990s. American medicine was then based on an acute-care model, where a patient presented with a set of signs and symptoms, the physician made the appropriate diagnosis and prescribed the treatment, and the patient received the treatment and returned home. The acute-care model was not designed for patients with chronic disease. Recognizing that the acute-care model was not working, many healthcare workers and policy makers proposed alternative or supplemental programs to address its deficiencies, such as expanding managed care and instituting disease-management and case-management programs, but they never fundamentally addressed the delivery of healthcare to the patient. Wagner and colleagues proposed a new way to improve chronic illness care that addressed healthcare delivery, based on their Chronic Care Model. The Chronic Care Model, which celebrates its tenth anniversary this year, was a comprehensive change to the way healthcare is delivered to patients with chronic conditions (Wagner 1996, 1998). The model focuses on several aspects of the healthcare organization. Healthcare delivery would evolve from a simple doctor-patient relationship where the physician told the patient what to do - to a more collaborative process between an informed patient and a prepared, proactive healthcare team. The healthcare team works within an organized system, where healthcare is evidence-based, systems are in place to measure and track outcomes, and information is fed back to patients and physicians. In this system patients are proactively followed (as opposed to the system reacting to patient demand), patients are empowered to self manage their disease, and the healthcare system works with its surrounding community. These elements have gradually begun to be adopted nationally. PATIENT-CENTERED MEDICAL HOME Another approach to improving chronic illness care that has been gaining support is the patient-centered medical home. The medical home is a model of healthcare delivery that focuses on an ongoing relationship between patients and their providers in a comprehensive healthcare delivery system (Iglehart 2008). The concept predates the Chronic Care Model and was originally proposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in the late 1960s. It focused on having a unified medical record for children with special healthcare needs, who were often treated by multiple providers who did not communicate well among themselves (Sia 2004). By 1992, the AAP broadened the concept by stating that the healthcare should be directed by "well-trained physicians who provide primary care" (Medical Home Initiatives for Children with Special Needs Project Advisory Committee 2002). In February 2007, the AAP, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, and the American Osteopathic Association issued a joint statement supporting the adoption of the patient centered medical home (AAFP 2007). They agreed that in a medical home: (1) each patient should have a personal physician who provides continuous and comprehensive care; (2) the physician should lead a practice-level team that assists in providing ongoing care for the patient; (3) care should be person-and family-oriented and include care for all stages of life; (4) care should be coordinated and integrated across both the healthcare system and the patient's community where the appropriate use of health information technology will ensure that information is available when and where it is needed; (5) care is evidencebased with ongoing measurement of quality, active feedback of information to healthcare providers, patient education, and involvement of the patient in decision-making; (6) improved patient access to and communication with their healthcare team; and (7) payment reform, including payments for care coordination and non-face-to-face visits. …

Background Peripherally inserted central catheters are associated with upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis. Whether they also are associated with lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism is unknown. We examined the risk of venous thromboembolism in deep veins of the arm, leg, and chest after peripherally inserted central catheter placement. Methods We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of 76,242 hospitalized medical patients from 48 Michigan hospitals. Peripherally inserted central catheter presence, comorbidities, venous thrombosis risk factors, and thrombotic events within 90 days from hospital admission were ascertained by phone and record review. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to examine the association between peripherally inserted central catheter placement and 90-day hazard of upper- and lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, adjusting for patient-level characteristics and natural clustering within hospitals. Results A total of 3790 patients received a peripherally inserted central catheter during hospitalization. From hospital admission to 90 days, 876 thromboembolic events (208 upper-extremity deep vein thromboses, 372 lower-extremity deep vein thromboses, and 296 pulmonary emboli) were identified. After risk adjustment, peripherally inserted central catheter use was independently associated with all-cause venous thromboembolism (hazard ratio [HR], 3.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.59-3.85), upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis (HR, 10.49; 95% CI, 7.79-14.11), and lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.02-2.15). Peripherally inserted central catheter use was not associated with pulmonary embolism (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.86-2.06). Results were robust to sensitivity analyses incorporating receipt of pharmacologic prophylaxis during hospitalization. Conclusions Peripherally inserted central catheter use is associated with upper- and lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis. Weighing the thrombotic risks conferred by peripherally inserted central catheters against clinical benefits seems necessary.

Introduction: In 1996 the University of Michigan Health System created the Guidelines Utilization, Implementation, Development, and Evaluation Studies (GUIDES) unit to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of primary care for common medical problems. GUIDES’s primary functions are to oversee the development of evidence-based, practical clinical guidelines for common medical conditions; measure and provide feedback on physicians’ performance; and facilitate systemic changes to support appropriate care. Various methods are used to improve care, including evidence reviews, formal education, informal clinical “opinion leaders,” feedback, reminders, and procedure changes. Twenty-four common medical conditions have been addressed through this process. More than 30 measures of clinical performance have been developed and reported. Methods: This case study describes a systematic, multifaceted program to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of primary care. Results: Illustrative results for clinical performance are presented for 2 measures of chronic care, 2 measures of preventive care, and 2 measures of acute care. All 6 measures show general improvement in performance across years, with performance near or above the National Committee for Quality Assurance’s 90th percentile for Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set measures. Discussion: A systematic approach involving all relevant components of a health system integrates the synthesis of information, education about the information and how to implement it, and addressing operational barriers. Benefits include a curriculum that is shared across faculty, residents, and medical students and more uniform quality of care that faculty model for physicians-in-training.

Rationale and objectives Gender-based psychosocial factors appear to influence colorectal cancer (CRC) screening adherence. Given its near-universal acceptance by the public, screening mammography represents a potential “teachable moment” for educating patients about the risk of CRC. Accordingly, to better understand screening behaviors among women, data from the Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) were analyzed to identify potential relationships that would allow interventions to enhance CRC screening. Materials and methods Women 50 years and older who participated in the BRFSS 2001 survey were included in the analysis. Colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening adherence with American Cancer Society guidelines was determined. We identified the association between breast and cervical cancer screening adherence and general health and demographic characteristics with CRC screening adherence. Results After adjustment for sociodemographic factors in a multivariate analysis, women 60–69 years old (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.50; P P P P P P P P P P P P Conclusion Women with up-to-date mammography and cervical cancer screening were more likely to be up-to-date with CRC screening. Regardless of the increased association between non−CRC-related cancer screening and CRC screening, rates of CRC screening utilization remained low in these otherwise compliant populations.

Background Despite the controversy over the utility of routine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in reducing prostate cancer-specific mortality, it has gained widespread use throughout the United States. Although colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces CRC mortality and appears to be cost effective, CRC screening adherence is suboptimal. To better understand screening behaviors among men, the Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Survey was used to identify potential relationships that would allow interventions to enhance CRC screening. Study design We included in our analysis 22,304 men, 50 years and older, who participated in the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Survey. Chi-square and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the independent correlates of adherence to CRC screening. Independent variables evaluated were age, race, educational level, employment status, income, health insurance, the presence of a personal physician, self-reported general health, current smoking status, and receiving a PSA test. Results Men were more adherent with PSA screening than CRC screening (50.4% versus 47.6%;p Conclusions More men received PSA testing than CRC screening. Men who received PSA testing were more likely to adhere to CRC screening. Taken together, PSA testing may represent a "teachable moment" for a behavior-related intervention aimed at reducing the risk of colon cancer. Targeting men who already accept one form of cancer screening can potentially increase CRC screening adherence.

Rationale and objectives The American Cancer Society (ACS) and the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommend colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to begin at age 50 in individuals at average risk for CRC. To estimate rate at which women eligible for CRC screening at the time of screening mammography attendance later completed in CRC screening, we retrospectively evaluated CRC screening utilization in women who underwent screening mammography at our institution. Materials and methods We retrospectively identified 3357 women between the ages of 50 to 75 who received screening mammography in 1998 at a single academic medical center using the institution’s Radiology Information System (RIS). Additional information collected from the institution’s Health System Data Warehouse and the Radiology department’s mammography quality assurance data included mammography results, Breast Imaging Reporting and Database System (BI-RADS) classification of mammography findings, recommendation for screening mammography follow-up, insurance status, and CRC screening utilization after screening mammography. After excluding women who were current with CRC screening at the time of mammography, we determined the proportion of eligible women who completed CRC screening after mammography. Age, insurance type, BI-RADS code, and recommendation code were evaluated as potential predictors of CRC screening completion in eligible women. Results Of the 3357 women between the ages of 50 and 75 who received screening mammography in 1998, only 414 (12.3%) were current with CRC screening at the time of screening mammography. Of the remaining 2943 women who were eligible for CRC screening at the time of screening mammography, 142 (4.8%) subsequently completed CRC screening. Average time to completion of CRC screening after screening mammography is 35.4 months (range, 0.27–64.9). Managed care insurance was the only significant predictor of CRC screening completion after screening mammography in eligible women after adjusting for other variables (adjusted OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.21–2.47, P Conclusions Prevalence studies have demonstrated that women who were compliant with screening mammography were more compliant with CRC screening. Our data suggest that despite this increased compliance, overall incidence of CRC screening is low in the screening mammography population.