Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background and ObjectivesPercutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is an analgesic modality involving the insertion of a lead through an introducing needle followed by the delivery of electric current. This modality has been reported to treat chronic pain as well as postoperative pain the day following knee surgery. However, it remains unknown if this analgesic technique may be used in ambulatory subjects following foot procedures beginning within the recovery room immediately following surgery, and with only short series of patients reported to date, the only available data are derived from strictly observational studies. The purposes of this proof-of-concept study were to demonstrate the feasibility of using percutaneous sciatic nerve PNS to treat postoperative pain following ambulatory foot surgery in the immediate postoperative period and provide the first available data from a randomized controlled study design to provide evidence of analgesic effect.MethodsPreoperatively, an electrical lead (SPRINT; SPR Therapeutics, Inc, Cleveland, Ohio) was percutaneously inserted posterior to the sciatic nerve between the subgluteal region and bifurcation with ultrasound guidance. Following hallux valgus osteotomy, subjects received 5 minutes of either stimulation or sham in a randomized, double-masked fashion followed by a 5-minute crossover period and then continuous stimulation until lead removal on postoperative days 14 to 28.ResultsDuring the initial 5-minute treatment period, subjects randomized to stimulation (n = 4) experienced a downward trajectory in their pain over the 5 minutes of treatment, whereas those receiving sham (n = 3) reported no such change until their subsequent 5-minute stimulation crossover. During the subsequent 30 minutes of stimulation, pain scores decreased to 52% of baseline (n = 7). Three subjects (43%) used a continuous popliteal nerve block for rescue analgesia during postoperative days 0 to 3. Overall, resting and dynamic pain scores averaged less than 1 on the numeric rating scale, and opioid use averaged less than 1 tablet daily with active stimulation. One lead dislodged, 2 fractured during use, and 1 fractured during intentional withdrawal.ConclusionsThis proof-of-concept study demonstrates that percutaneous sciatic nerve PNS is feasible for ambulatory foot surgery and suggests that this modality provides analgesia and decreases opioid requirements following hallux valgus procedures. However, lead dislodgement and fracture are concerns.Clinical Trial RegistrationThis study was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT02898103.

BackgroundWe tested the hypothesis that, following unicompartment knee arthroplasty, a continuous adductor canal block decreases the time to reach 4 discharge criteria compared with a continuous femoral nerve block.MethodsSubjects were randomized to either an adductor canal or femoral perineural catheter (2-day ropivacaine 0.2% infusion) in an unmasked fashion. The primary outcome was the time to attain 4 discharge criteria: (1) adequate analgesia; (2) intravenous opioid independence; (3) ability to independently stand, walk 3 m, return, and sit down; and (4) ambulate 30 m.ResultsSubjects with an adductor canal catheter (n = 15) reached all 4 criteria in a median of 35 hours (interquartile range, 24–43 hours), compared with 40 hours (interquartile range, 27–69 hours) for those with a femoral catheter (n = 15; Wilcoxon rank sum test: P = 0.46; log-rank test: P = 0.16). However, the percentages of subjects (adductor canal: femoral) who reached the 2 mobilization criteria were 27%:0% on postoperative day (POD) 0, 93%:53% on POD 1, and 100%:73% on POD 2. Of adductor canal subjects, 100% were discharge ready by POD 2, compared with only 73% of femoral subjects (P < 0.001).ConclusionsCompared with a continuous femoral nerve block, a continuous adductor canal block did not appreciably decrease the median number of hours to overall discharge readiness, yet did decrease the number of discrete days until discharge readiness. These results are applicable to only unicompartment knee arthroplasty and must be considered preliminary because of the limited sample size of this pilot study.

These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG’s guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.

Cancer genetic testing to assess an individual's cancer risk and to enable genomics-informed cancer treatment has grown exponentially in the past decade. Because of this continued growth and a shortage of health care workers, there is a need for automated strategies that provide high-quality genetics services to patients to reduce the clinical demand for genetics providers. Conversational agents have shown promise in managing mental health, pain, and other chronic conditions and are increasingly being used in cancer genetic services. However, research on how patients interact with these agents to satisfy their information needs is limited. Our primary aim is to assess user interactions with a conversational agent for pretest genetics education. We conducted a feasibility study of user interactions with a conversational agent who delivers pretest genetics education to primary care patients without cancer who are eligible for cancer genetic evaluation. The conversational agent provided scripted content similar to that delivered in a pretest genetic counseling visit for cancer genetic testing. Outside of a core set of information delivered to all patients, users were able to navigate within the chat to request additional content in their areas of interest. An artificial intelligence-based preprogrammed library was also established to allow users to ask open-ended questions to the conversational agent. Transcripts of the interactions were recorded. Here, we describe the information selected, time spent to complete the chat, and use of the open-ended question feature. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative measures, and thematic analyses were used for qualitative responses. We invited 103 patients to participate, of which 88.3% (91/103) were offered access to the conversational agent, 39% (36/91) started the chat, and 32% (30/91) completed the chat. Most users who completed the chat indicated that they wanted to continue with genetic testing (21/30, 70%), few were unsure (9/30, 30%), and no patient declined to move forward with testing. Those who decided to test spent an average of 10 (SD 2.57) minutes on the chat, selected an average of 1.87 (SD 1.2) additional pieces of information, and generally did not ask open-ended questions. Those who were unsure spent 4 more minutes on average (mean 14.1, SD 7.41; P=.03) on the chat, selected an average of 3.67 (SD 2.9) additional pieces of information, and asked at least one open-ended question. The pretest chat provided enough information for most patients to decide on cancer genetic testing, as indicated by the small number of open-ended questions. A subset of participants were still unsure about receiving genetic testing and may require additional education or interpersonal support before making a testing decision. Conversational agents have the potential to become a scalable alternative for pretest genetics education, reducing the clinical demand on genetics providers.

Background Advances in genetics and sequencing technologies are enabling the identification of more individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility who could benefit from tailored screening and prevention recommendations. While cancer family history information is used in primary care settings to identify unaffected patients who could benefit from a cancer genetics evaluation, this information is underutilized. System-level population health management strategies are needed to assist health care systems in identifying patients who may benefit from genetic services. In addition, because of the limited number of trained genetics specialists and increasing patient volume, the development of innovative and sustainable approaches to delivering cancer genetic services is essential. Methods We are conducting a randomized controlled trial, entitled Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services (BRIDGE), to address these needs. The trial is comparing uptake of genetic counseling, uptake of genetic testing, and patient adherence to management recommendations for automated, patient-directed versus enhanced standard of care cancer genetics services delivery models. An algorithm-based system that utilizes structured cancer family history data available in the electronic health record (EHR) is used to identify unaffected patients who receive primary care at the study sites and meet current guidelines for cancer genetic testing. We are enrolling eligible patients at two healthcare systems (University of Utah Health and New York University Langone Health) through outreach to a randomly selected sample of 2780 eligible patients in the two sites, with 1:1 randomization to the genetic services delivery arms within sites. Study outcomes are assessed through genetics clinic records, EHR, and two follow-up questionnaires at 4 weeks and 12 months after last genetic counseling contactpre-test genetic counseling. Discussion BRIDGE is being conducted in two healthcare systems with different clinical structures and patient populations. Innovative aspects of the trial include a randomized comparison of a chatbot-based genetic services delivery model to standard of care, as well as identification of at-risk individuals through a sustainable EHR-based system. The findings from the BRIDGE trial will advance the state of the science in identification of unaffected patients with inherited cancer susceptibility and delivery of genetic services to those patients. Trial registration BRIDGE is registered as NCT03985852 . The trial was registered on June 6, 2019 at clinicaltrials.gov .

BackgroundA reliable and valid clinically practical multi-domain self-report and caregiver-report tool is needed for tracking actionable symptoms in primary care for elderly patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs).ObjectiveAssess internal consistency reliability, test–retest reliability, construct validity, and sensitivity to change for SymTrak.Design and ParticipantsAmong 600 (200 patient–caregiver dyads, 200 patients without an identified caregiver) participants, SymTrak was telephone interviewer–administered at baseline and 3-month follow-up, and at 24 h post-baseline for assessing test–retest reliability in a random subsample of 180 (60 dyads, 60 individual patients) participants.Main MeasuresDemographic questions, SymTrak, Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3).Key ResultsExploratory factor analysis indicated a single dominant dimension for SymTrak items for both patients and caregivers. Coefficient alpha and 24-h test–retest reliability, respectively, were high for the 23-item SymTrak total score for both patient-reported (0.85; 0.87) and caregiver-reported (0.86; 0.91) scores. Construct validity was supported by monotone decreasing relationships between the mean of SymTrak total scores across the poor-to-excellent categories of physical and emotional general health, and by high correlations with HUI3 overall utility score, even after adjusting for demographic covariates (standardized linear regression coefficient = − 0.84 for patients; − 0.70 for caregivers). Three-month change in the SymTrak total score was sensitive to detecting criterion standard 3-month reliable change categories (Improved, Stable, Declined) in HUI3-based health-related quality of life, especially for caregiver-reported scores.ConclusionsSymTrak demonstrates good internal consistency and test–retest reliability, construct validity, and sensitivity to change over a 3-month period, supporting its use for monitoring symptoms for older adults with MCCs.

BackgroundA clinically practical, brief, user-friendly, multi-domain self-report and caregiver-report tool is needed for tracking actionable symptoms in primary care for elderly patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs).ObjectiveDevelop and assess usability, administration time, and internal reliability of SymTrak.Design and ParticipantsPhase I: legacy instruments, content validity, analyses of existing data, focus groups (physicians, nurses, patients, informal caregivers), and Think Aloud interviews (patients, caregivers) were used to develop SymTrak. Phase II (pilot feasibility study): 81 (27 patient-caregiver dyads, 27 patients without an identified caregiver) participants were self-administered SymTrak in clinic.Main MeasuresSymTrak and demographic questions.Key ResultsConsistent themes emerged from phase I focus groups. Ambiguous wording was corrected with Think Aloud feedback. In phase II, patients and caregivers preferred circling words instead of numbers for item response options. SymTrak self-administration completion time in clinic was brief; mean was 2.4, 3.0, and 3.3 min for the finalized circlingwords version, respectively, for caregivers, dyadic patients, and patients without a caregiver; and the maximum was 6.2 min for any participant. Usability questionnaire ratings were high. Cronbach’s alpha for the SymTrak 23-item total score was 0.86, 0.79, and 0.81 for caregivers, dyadic patients, and patients without a caregiver, respectively.ConclusionsSymTrak demonstrates content validity, positive qualitative findings, high perceived usability, brief self-administered completion time, and good internal reliability.

Increasing numbers of unaffected individuals could benefit from genetic evaluation for inherited cancer susceptibility. Automated conversational agents (ie, chatbots) are being developed for cancer genetics contexts; however, randomized comparisons with standard of care (SOC) are needed. To examine whether chatbot and SOC approaches are equivalent in completion of pretest cancer genetic services and genetic testing. This equivalence trial (Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services [BRIDGE] randomized clinical trial) was conducted between August 15, 2020, and August 31, 2023, at 2 US health care systems (University of Utah Health and NYU Langone Health). Participants were aged 25 to 60 years, had had a primary care visit in the previous 3 years, were eligible for cancer genetic evaluation, were English or Spanish speaking, had no prior cancer diagnosis other than nonmelanoma skin cancer, had no prior cancer genetic counseling or testing, and had an electronic patient portal account. Participants were randomized 1:1 at the patient level to the study groups at each site. In the chatbot intervention group, patients were invited in a patient portal outreach message to complete a pretest genetics education chat. In the enhanced SOC control group, patients were invited to complete an SOC pretest appointment with a certified genetic counselor. Primary outcomes were completion of pretest cancer genetic services (ie, pretest genetics education chat or pretest genetic counseling appointment) and completion of genetic testing. Equivalence hypothesis testing was used to compare the study groups. This study included 3073 patients (1554 in the chatbot group and 1519 in the enhanced SOC control group). Their mean (SD) age at outreach was 43.8 (9.9) years, and most (2233 of 3063 [72.9%]) were women. A total of 204 patients (7.3%) were Black, 317 (11.4%) were Latinx, and 2094 (75.0%) were White. The estimated percentage point difference for completion of pretest cancer genetic services between groups was 2.0 (95% CI, -1.1 to 5.0). The estimated percentage point difference for completion of genetic testing was -1.3 (95% CI, -3.7 to 1.1). Analyses suggested equivalence in the primary outcomes. The findings of the BRIDGE equivalence trial support the use of chatbot approaches to offer cancer genetic services. Chatbot tools can be a key component of sustainable and scalable population health management strategies to enhance access to cancer genetic services. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03985852.

Clinical decision support (CDS) algorithms are increasingly being implemented in health care systems to identify patients for specialty care. However, systematic differences in missingness of electronic health record (EHR) data may lead to disparities in identification by CDS algorithms. To examine the availability and comprehensiveness of cancer family history information (FHI) in patients' EHRs by sex, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, and language preference in 2 large health care systems in 2021. This retrospective EHR quality improvement study used EHR data from 2 health care systems: University of Utah Health (UHealth) and NYU Langone Health (NYULH). Participants included patients aged 25 to 60 years who had a primary care appointment in the previous 3 years. Data were collected or abstracted from the EHR from December 10, 2020, to October 31, 2021, and analyzed from June 15 to October 31, 2021. Prior collection of cancer FHI in primary care settings. Availability was defined as having any FHI and any cancer FHI in the EHR and was examined at the patient level. Comprehensiveness was defined as whether a cancer family history observation in the EHR specified the type of cancer diagnosed in a family member, the relationship of the family member to the patient, and the age at onset for the family member and was examined at the observation level. Among 144 484 patients in the UHealth system, 53.6% were women; 74.4% were non-Hispanic or non-Latino and 67.6% were White; and 83.0% had an English language preference. Among 377 621 patients in the NYULH system, 55.3% were women; 63.2% were non-Hispanic or non-Latino, and 55.3% were White; and 89.9% had an English language preference. Patients from historically medically undeserved groups-specifically, Black vs White patients (UHealth: 17.3% [95% CI, 16.1%-18.6%] vs 42.8% [95% CI, 42.5%-43.1%]; NYULH: 24.4% [95% CI, 24.0%-24.8%] vs 33.8% [95% CI, 33.6%-34.0%]), Hispanic or Latino vs non-Hispanic or non-Latino patients (UHealth: 27.2% [95% CI, 26.5%-27.8%] vs 40.2% [95% CI, 39.9%-40.5%]; NYULH: 24.4% [95% CI, 24.1%-24.7%] vs 31.6% [95% CI, 31.4%-31.8%]), Spanish-speaking vs English-speaking patients (UHealth: 18.4% [95% CI, 17.2%-19.1%] vs 40.0% [95% CI, 39.7%-40.3%]; NYULH: 15.1% [95% CI, 14.6%-15.6%] vs 31.1% [95% CI, 30.9%-31.2%), and men vs women (UHealth: 30.8% [95% CI, 30.4%-31.2%] vs 43.0% [95% CI, 42.6%-43.3%]; NYULH: 23.1% [95% CI, 22.9%-23.3%] vs 34.9% [95% CI, 34.7%-35.1%])-had significantly lower availability and comprehensiveness of cancer FHI (P < .001). These findings suggest that systematic differences in the availability and comprehensiveness of FHI in the EHR may introduce informative presence bias as inputs to CDS algorithms. The observed differences may also exacerbate disparities for medically underserved groups. System-, clinician-, and patient-level efforts are needed to improve the collection of FHI.

Polytrauma, including mild traumatic brain injury, posttraumatic stress disorder, and orthopedic conditions, is common among combat veterans (CVs) from Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. Medical conditions, coupled with deployment-related training, may affect CVs' fitness to drive and contribute to post-deployment crash and injury risks. However, empirical interventions are lacking. Therefore, the study purpose was to examine the efficacy of an occupational therapy driving intervention (OT-DI) with pre and post testing of CVs. Using a DriveSafety 250 simulator, Occupational Therapy-Driver Rehabilitation Specialists recorded driving errors. Eight CVs (mean age = 39.83, SD = 7.80) received three OT-DI sessions, which incorporated strategies to address driving errors and visual search retraining. We determined baseline driving errors (mean = 31.63, SD = 8.96) were double the number of posttest errors (mean = 15.38, SD = 9.71). At posttesting, a significant (p < 0.05) decrease was noted for total errors and lane maintenance. Despite study constraints, preliminary data support the efficacy of the OT-DI.