Explore the vast range of titles available.

Telemedicine’s payment and regulatory structures, licensing, credentialing, and implementation take time to work through, but health systems that have already invested in telemedicine are well positioned to ensure that patients with Covid-19 receive the care they need.

Background An international panel achieved consensus on 9 need-based and 2 time-based major referral criteria to identify patients appropriate for outpatient palliative care referral. To better understand the operational characteristics of these criteria, we examined the proportion and timing of patients who met these referral criteria at our Supportive Care Clinic. Methods We retrieved data on consecutive patients with advanced cancer who were referred to our Supportive Care Clinic between January 1, 2016, and February 18, 2016. We examined the proportion of patients who met each major criteria and its timing. Results Among 200 patients (mean age 60, 53% female), the median overall survival from outpatient palliative care referral was 14 (95% confidence interval 9.2, 17.5) months. A majority ( n  = 170, 85%) of patients met at least 1 major criteria; specifically, 28%, 30%, 20%, and 8% met 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4 criteria, respectively. The most commonly met need-based criteria were severe physical symptoms ( n  = 140, 70%), emotional symptoms ( n  = 36, 18%), decision-making needs ( n  = 26, 13%), and brain/leptomeningeal metastases ( n  = 25, 13%). For time-based criteria, 54 (27%) were referred within 3 months of diagnosis of advanced cancer and 63 (32%) after progression from ≥ 2 lines of palliative systemic therapy. The median duration from patient first meeting any criterion to palliative care referral was 2.4 (interquartile range 0.1, 8.6) months. Conclusions Patients were referred early to our palliative care clinic and a vast majority (85%) of them met at least one major criteria. Standardized referral based on these criteria may facilitate even earlier referral.

Little is known about whether treatment in a specialised out-patient mood disorder clinic improves long-term prognosis for patients discharged from initial psychiatric hospital admissions for bipolar disorder. To assess the effect of treatment in a specialised out-patient mood disorder clinic v. standard decentralised psychiatric treatment among patients discharged from one of their first three psychiatric hospital admissions for bipolar disorder. Patients discharged from their first, second or third hospital admission with a single manic episode or bipolar disorder were randomised to treatment in a specialised out-patient mood disorder clinic or standard care (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00253071). The primary outcome measure was readmission to hospital, which was obtained from the Danish Psychiatric Central Register. A total of 158 patients with mania/bipolar disorder were included. The rate of readmission to hospital was significantly decreased for patients treated in the mood disorder clinic compared with standard treatment (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.97, P = 0.034). Patients treated in the mood disorder clinic more often used a mood stabiliser or an antipsychotic and satisfaction with treatment was more prevalent than among patients who received standard care. Treatment in a specialised mood disorder clinic early in the course of bipolar disorder substantially reduces readmission to a psychiatric hospital and increases satisfaction with care.

A Camden, New Jersey, “hotspotting” program is designed to prevent rehospitalizations among “superutilizers” of heath care services through home visits and telephone calls from nurses, social workers, and community health care workers who help coordinate outpatient care. In a randomized, controlled trial, the program did not reduce hospital readmissions.

Background Mental disorders are a leading cause of global disability, driven primarily by depression and anxiety. Most of the disease burden is in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs), where 75% of adults with mental disorders have no service access. Our research team has worked in western Kenya for nearly ten years. Primary care populations in Kenya have high prevalence of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). To address these treatment needs with a sustainable, scalable mental health care strategy, we are partnering with local and national mental health stakeholders in Kenya and Uganda to identify 1) evidence-based strategies for first-line and second-line treatment delivered by non-specialists integrated with primary care, 2) investigate presumed mediators of treatment outcome and 3) determine patient-level moderators of treatment effect to inform personalized, resource-efficient, non-specialist treatments and sequencing, with costing analyses. Our implementation approach is guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework. Methods/design We will use a Sequential, Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) to randomize 2710 patients from the outpatient clinics at Kisumu County Hospital (KCH) who have MDD, PTSD or both to either 12 weekly sessions of non-specialist-delivered Interpersonal Psychotherapy (IPT) or to 6 months of fluoxetine prescribed by a nurse or clinical officer. Participants who are not in remission at the conclusion of treatment will be re-randomized to receive the other treatment (IPT receives fluoxetine and vice versa) or to combination treatment (IPT and fluoxetine). The SMART-DAPPER Implementation Resource Team, (IRT) will drive the application of the EPIS model and adaptations during the course of the study to optimize the relevance of the data for generalizability and scale –up. Discussion The results of this research will be significant in three ways: 1) they will determine the effectiveness of non-specialist delivered first- and second-line treatment for MDD and/or PTSD, 2) they will investigate key mechanisms of action for each treatment and 3) they will produce tailored adaptive treatment strategies essential for optimal sequencing of treatment for MDD and/or PTSD in low resource settings with associated cost information – a critical gap for addressing a leading global cause of disability. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03466346 , registered March 15, 2018.

Purpose This study was to investigate the factors associated with preventable hospitalization due to ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) in children with autism. Methods Using secondary data from the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), multivariable regression analyses were conducted to determine the potential effect of race and income level on the likelihood of inpatient stays for ACSCs among autistic children. Pediatric ACSCs included three acute conditions (dehydration, gastroenteritis, and urinary infection) and three chronic conditions (asthma, constipation, and diabetes short-term complications). Results In this analysis, there were 21,733 hospitalizations among children with autism; about 10% were hospitalized due to pediatric ACSCs. Overall, the odds of ACSCs hospitalization were greater among Hispanic and Black autistic children versus White autistic children. Both Hispanic and Black autistic children from the lowest income level had the highest odds to be hospitalized for chronic ACSCs. Conclusion Inequities of access to health care among racial/ethnic minorities were most notable for autistic children with chronic ACSC conditions.

The emergence of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in March 2020 created unprecedented challenges in the provision of scheduled ambulatory cancer care. As a result, there has been a renewed focus on video-based telehealth consultations as a means to continue ambulatory care. The aim of this study is to analyze the change in video visit volume at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Comprehensive Cancer Center in response to COVID-19 and compare patient demographics and appointment data from January 1, 2020, and in the 11 weeks after the transition to video visits. Patient demographics and appointment data (dates, visit types, and departments) were extracted from the electronic health record reporting database. Video visits were performed using a HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)-compliant video conferencing platform with a pre-existing workflow. In 17 departments and divisions at the UCSF Cancer Center, 2284 video visits were performed in the 11 weeks before COVID-19 changes were implemented (mean 208, SD 75 per week) and 12,946 video visits were performed in the 11-week post-COVID-19 period (mean 1177, SD 120 per week). The proportion of video visits increased from 7%-18% to 54%-72%, between the pre- and post-COVID-19 periods without any disparity based on race/ethnicity, primary language, or payor. In a remarkably brief period of time, we rapidly scaled the utilization of telehealth in response to COVID-19 and maintained access to complex oncologic care at a time of social distancing.

Background There is growing evidence that specialized clinical services targeted toward individuals early in the course of a psychotic illness may be effective in reducing both the clinical and economic burden associated with these illnesses. Unfortunately, the United States has lagged behind other countries in the delivery of specialized, multi-component care to individuals early in the course of a psychotic illness. A key factor contributing to this lag is the limited available data demonstrating the clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of early intervention for psychosis among individuals served by the American mental health system. Thus, the goal of this study is to present clinical and cost outcome data with regard to a first-episode psychosis treatment center within the American mental health system: the Early Psychosis Intervention Center (EPICENTER). Methods Sixty-eight consecutively enrolled individuals with first-episode psychosis completed assessments of symptomatology, social functioning, educational/vocational functioning, cognitive functioning, substance use, and service utilization upon enrollment in EPICENTER and after 6 months of EPICENTER care. All participants were provided with access to a multi-component treatment package comprised of cognitive behavioral therapy, family psychoeducation, and metacognitive remediation. Results Over the first 6 months of EPICENTER care, participants experienced improvements in symptomatology, social functioning, educational/vocational functioning, cognitive functioning, and substance abuse. The average cost of care during the first 6 months of EPICENTER participation was lower than the average cost during the 6-months prior to joining EPICENTER. These savings occurred despite the additional costs associated with the receipt of EPICENTER care and were driven primarily by reductions in the utilization of inpatient psychiatric services and contacts with the legal system. Conclusions The results of our study suggest that multi-component interventions for first-episode psychosis provided in the US mental health system may be both clinically-beneficial and cost-effective. Although additional research is needed, these findings provide preliminary support for the growing delivery of specialized multi-component interventions for first-episode psychosis within the United States. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01570972 ; Date of Trial Registration: November 7, 2011

BACKGROUND Traditional ambulatory training models have limitations in important domains, including opportunities for residents to learn, fragmentation of care delivery experience, and satisfaction with ambulatory experiences. New models of ambulatory training are needed. AIM To compare the impact of a traditional ambulatory training model with a templated 4 + 1 model. SETTING A large university-based internal medicine residency using three different training sites: a patient-centered medical home, a hospital-based ambulatory clinic, and community private practices. PARTICIPANTS Residents, faculty, and administrative staff. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Development of a templated 4 + 1 model of residency where trainees do not attend to inpatient and outpatient responsibilities simultaneously. PROGRAM EVALUATION A mixed-methods analysis of survey and nominal group data measuring three primary outcomes: 1) Perception of learning opportunities and quality of faculty teaching; 2) Reported fragmentation of care delivery experience; 3) Satisfaction with ambulatory experiences. Self-reported empanelment was a secondary outcome. Residents’ learning opportunities increased ( p  = 0.007) but quality of faculty teaching was unchanged. Participants reported less fragmentation in the care residents provide patients in the inpatient and outpatient setting ( p  < 0.0001). Satisfaction with ambulatory training improved ( p  < 0.0001). Self-reported empanelment also increased ( p  < 0.0001). Results held true for residents, faculty, and staff at all three ambulatory training sites ( p  < 0.0001). DISCUSSION A 4 + 1 model increased resident time in ambulatory continuity clinic, enhanced learning opportunities, reduced fragmentation of care residents provide, and improved satisfaction with ambulatory experiences. More studies of similar models are needed to evaluate effects on additional trainee and patient outcomes.