Explore the vast range of titles available.

The impact of statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and recovery is important given their high prevalence of use among individuals at risk for severe COVID-19. We studied the association between use of statin/angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/ARB in the month before hospital admission, with risk of severe outcome, and with time to severe outcome or disease recovery, among patients hospitalized for COVID-19. We performed a retrospective single-center study of all patients hospitalized at University of California San Diego Health between February 10, 2020 and June 17, 2020 (n = 170 hospitalized for COVID-19, n = 5,281 COVID-negative controls). Logistic regression and competing risks analyses were used to investigate progression to severe disease (death or intensive care unit admission), and time to discharge without severe disease. Severe disease occurred in 53% of COVID-positive inpatients. Median time from hospitalization to severe disease was 2 days; median time to recovery was 7 days. Statin use prior to admission was associated with reduced risk of severe COVID-19 (adjusted OR 0.29, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.71, p < 0.01) and faster time to recovery among those without severe disease (adjusted HR for recovery 2.69, 95%CI 1.36 to 5.33, p < 0.01). The association between statin use and severe disease was smaller in the COVID-negative cohort (p for interaction = 0.07). There was potential evidence of faster time to recovery with ARB use (adjusted HR 1.92, 95%CI 0.81 to 4.56). In conclusion, statin use during the 30 days prior to admission for COVID-19 was associated with a lower risk of developing severe COVID-19, and a faster time to recovery among patients without severe disease.

Digital health technologies may be useful tools in the management of chronic diseases. We performed a systematic review of digital health interventions in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and evaluated its impact on (i) disease activity monitoring, (ii) treatment adherence, (iii) quality of life (QoL) measures, and/or (iv) health care utilization. Through a systematic review of multiple databases through August 31, 2020, we identified randomized controlled trials in patients with IBD comparing digital health technologies vs standard of care (SoC) for clinical management and monitoring and reporting impact on IBD disease activity, treatment adherence, QoL, and/or health care utilization or cost-effectiveness. We performed critical qualitative synthesis of the evidence supporting digital health interventions in patients with IBD and rated certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Overall, we included 14 randomized controlled trials (median, 98 patients; range 34-909 patients; follow-up <12 months) that compared web-based interventions, mobile applications, and different telemedicine platforms with SoC (clinic-based encounters). Although overall disease activity and risk of relapse were comparable between digital health technologies and SoC (very low certainty of evidence), digital health interventions were associated with lower rate of health care utilization and health care costs (low certainty of evidence). Digital health interventions did not significantly improve patients' QoL and treatment adherence compared with SoC (very low certainty of evidence). Trials may have intrinsic selection bias due to nature of digital interventions. Digital health technologies may be effective in decreasing health care utilization and costs, though may not offer advantage in reducing risk of relapse, QoL, and improving treatment adherence in patients with IBD. These techniques may offer value-based care for population health management.

Background Electronic health record (EHR)-based patient messages can contribute to burnout. Messages with a negative tone are particularly challenging to address. In this perspective, we describe our initial evaluation of large language model (LLM)-generated responses to negative EHR patient messages and contend that using LLMs to generate initial drafts may be feasible, although refinement will be needed. Methods A retrospective sample (n = 50) of negative patient messages was extracted from a health system EHR, de-identified, and inputted into an LLM (ChatGPT). Qualitative analyses were conducted to compare LLM responses to actual care team responses. Results Some LLM-generated draft responses varied from human responses in relational connection, informational content, and recommendations for next steps. Occasionally, the LLM draft responses could have potentially escalated emotionally charged conversations. Conclusion Further work is needed to optimize the use of LLMs for responding to negative patient messages in the EHR. Lay Summary Doctors and other clinicians are receiving a growing number of messages from patients through electronic health records systems. This workload is contributing to clinician burnout. Some messages can be very negative or emotionally charged. These messages often require a lot of time or effort to respond to. In this article, we discuss results from a preliminary evaluation we conducted using large language models (like ChatGPT). We analyzed whether these models could help provide starting drafts to respond to patient messages, with a focus on negative messages, since these can be particularly difficult. We found that ChatGPT provided reasonable starting drafts in many cases, but that there were also issues in the drafts that would require further editing. These issues included sometimes not drafting the text from the perspective of a clinician, using overly broad or generic language, inappropriate escalation (eg, instructing the patient to file complaints to the medical board), and inconsistent recommendations for in-person follow-up visits. Based on this evaluation, we highlight not only the promise and possibilities of this technology but also considerations and challenges that need to be addressed for optimizing its future use.

A busy community cardiologist finished reading eight echocardiograms over lunch and started clinic at 1 pm. As three patients waited, “Jane,” a 45-year-old graphic designer was seen for “skipped heart beat.” She works about 50 h a week, exercises at the local gym, and enjoys eating a healthy diet. About 4 months ago Jane began experiencing her heart “skipping beats.” She initially attributed the symptoms to long hours in the office and caffeine. But, over the holiday, her brother purchased a smart watch and she began digitally recording her cardiac rhythm. About a month ago, the device detected possible atrial fibrillation, so she called and scheduled this visit for a cardiology consultation. Upon that visitation, she and her physician reviewed the device readings. While it appeared to be an irregular rhythm, before either considered a treatment plan, they began to ask questions ranging from the following: “Is this an accurate diagnosis?” “What other data are available to better understand the risk of a cardiac arrhythmia?” “How is this data analyzed so that the best treatment plan can be made?” “And, what type of clinical decision support system is required to ‘virtually’ monitor people like me using digital health devices to improve the efficiency and quality of care delivered in population health?”

Objective: To assess acceptability and feasibility of rapid at-home COVID-19 testing and reporting of test results among individuals seeking care at community health centers (CHCs) and their household members. Methods: Participants were recruited from 2 Community Health Centers during a clinic visit or a community event. Over-the-counter COVID-19 tests were distributed to participants for self-testing and to offer testing to household members. Separate surveys were administered to collect baseline information on the study participant and to collect test results on the study participant and household members. We calculated the proportion of individuals who agreed to complete COVID home testing, those who reported test results, and the test positivity. For household members, we calculated the proportion who completed and reported results and the positivity rate. We assessed reasons for undergoing COVID-19 testing and the action taken by participants who reported positive tests. Results: A total of 2189 individuals were approached by CHC staff for participation and 1013 (46.3%) agreed to participate. Among the 959 participants with complete sociodemographic data, 88% were Hispanic and 82.6% were female. The proportion providing test results was 36.2% and the test positivity was 4.2%. Among the 1927 test reports, 35.3% for the index participant and 64.4% were for household members. The largest proportion of test results were for index participants (35.3%) and the second largest was for the participant’s children (32.1%), followed by parents (16.9%), and spouse/partner (13.2%). The 2 most common reasons for testing were symptoms (29%) and attending family gatherings (26%). Among test-positive individuals (n = 80), most (83.3%) noted that they isolated but only 16.3% called their provider and 1.3% visited a clinic. Conclusion: Our results show interest in at-home COVID-19 testing of multiple household members, as we headed into the endemic phase of the pandemic. However, reporting of test results was modest and among test-positive individuals, reporting results to a provider was very low. These results underscore the challenges with reporting and following guidelines among people undergoing home testing for COVID-19, which may have implications for future pandemics.

During 2016-2018, San Diego County, California, USA, experienced one of the largest hepatitis A outbreaks in the United States in 2 decades. In close partnership with local healthcare systems, San Diego County Public Health led a public health response to the outbreak that focused on a 3-pronged strategy to vaccinate, sanitize, and educate. Healthcare systems administered nearly half of the vaccinations delivered in San Diego County. At University of California San Diego Health, the use of informatics tools assisted with the identification of at-risk populations and with vaccine delivery across outpatient and inpatient settings. In addition, acute care facilities helped prevent further disease transmission by delaying the discharge of patients with hepatitis A who were experiencing homelessness. We assessed the public health roles that acute care hospitals can play during a large community outbreak and the critical nature of ongoing collaboration between hospitals and public health systems in controlling such outbreaks.

Cryptococcomas have been described in AIDS patients in the setting of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. We report the first case of human immunodeficiency virus-related inflammatory cerebral cryptococcoma to be treated with a recombinant human monoclonal tumor necrosis factor antagonist.

The study aim is to estimate sensitivity and specificity of anal cytology for histologic HSIL in analyses adjusted for the imperfect biopsy reference standard. Retrospective cohort study of an anal dysplasia screening program for HIV infected adults. We estimated the prevalence of histologic HSIL by concurrent cytology category and the associated cytology ROC area. Cytology operating characteristics for HSIL were estimated and adjusted for the imperfect reference standard by 3 methodologies. The study cohort included 261 patients with 3 available measures: (1) referral cytology; (2) HRA cytology; and (3) HRA directed biopsy. The prevalence of biopsy HSIL varied according to the concurrent HRA cytology result: 64.5% for HSIL or ASC-H, 12.6% for LSIL, 10.9% for ASCUS, and 6.3% for no abnormality. The cytology ROC area was 0.78. The observed prevalence of HSIL was 37% (referral cytology), 24% (HRA cytology), and 24% (HRA biopsy). Unadjusted estimates of sensitivity and specificity of cytology were 0.66 and 0.90, respectively. Adjusted estimates varied from 0.47-0.89 (sensitivity) and 0.89-1.0 (specificity). Analysis of a single dataset yields widely different estimates of anal cytology operating characteristics that depend on difficult to verify assumptions regarding the accuracy of the imperfect reference standard.

Here, we describe our patient-centered medical home (PCMH) quality improvement retention project conducted by a Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Ryan White-funded Primary Care HIV clinic. The single urban academic clinic serving 2,776 active HIV positive patients identified 25.8% (716/2,776) patients who had not been retained in care within the prior six months during two separate six-month interval analyses. Multiple modalities including a retention specialist, a secure clinic phone message line, algorithms, flyers, brochures, database, and staff education were built to facilitate re-engagement. The project located 87.7% (628/716) patients who had not been retained. The retention specialist was directly responsible for the return of 16.2% (116/716) patients. Results from the project demonstrated that a formalized approach is a necessary component to effective retention efforts. We believe that this work will provide a strategic framework for the development of randomized control trials to formally evaluate an HIV retention intervention.

Conflicts of Interest: Confirmatory test kits were supplied by Ora-sure Technologies. Gilead Sciences prodded a training grant. Funding/Support: The Routine Screening Campaign is funded by the District of Columbia Department of Health: $224 371 is allocated for personnel (2 full-time testers, 1 project coordinator/tester, 1 data manager/tester, and 1 part-time program manager/tester) and $153 262 for supplies and rapid test kits ($20 each). This amount does not include confirmatory testing: HIV Western blot ($271 each). Background: Approximately 232 700 (21%) of Americans are unaware of their HIV-seropositive status; this represents a potential for virus transmission. Revised recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control for HIV screening promote routine screening in the health care setting. We describe the implementation of a hospital-wide routine HIV screening program in the District of Columbia. Methods: Rapid HIV testing was conducted at Howard University Hospital on consenting patients at least 18 years of age using the OraSure OraQuick Advance® Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test. The study population includes Howard University Hospital patients who were offered HIV screening over a 12-month period at no cost. Screened patients received immediate test results and, for those patients found to be preliminarily reactive, confirmatory testing and linkage to care were offered. Results: Of the 12 836 patients who were offered testing, 7528 (58.6%) consented. Preliminary reactive test results were identified in 176 patients (2.3%). Overall, 45.5% were confirmed, of which 82.5% were confirmed positive. Screening protocol changes have led to 100% confirmation since implementation. Conclusions: Hospital-wide routine HIV screening is feasible and can be implemented effectively and efficiently. The HIV screening campaign instituted at Howard University Hospital identified a substantial number of HIV-positive individuals and provided critical connection to follow-up testing, counseling, and disease management services.