ATTITUDES TOWARD AND UTILIZATION OF NON-INVASIVE PRENATAL TESTING FOR CHROMOSOME ANEUPLOIDY AMONG OB/GYNS

Prenatal diagnosis is traditionally made via invasive procedures such as amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS). However, both procedures carry a risk of complications, including miscarriage. Many groups have spent years searching for a way to diagnose a chromosome aneuploidy without putting the fetus or the mother at risk for complications. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for chromosome aneuploidy became commercially available in the fall of 2011, with detection rates similar to those of invasive procedures for the common autosomal aneuploidies (Palomaki et al., 2011; Ashoor et al. 2012; Bianchi et al. 2012). Eventually NIPT may become the diagnostic standard of care and reduce invasive procedure-related losses (Palomaki et al., 2011). The integration of NIPT into clinical practice has potential to revolutionize prenatal diagnosis; however, it also raises some crucial issues for practitioners. Now that the test is clinically available, no studies have looked at the physicians that will be ordering the testing or referring patients to practitioners who do. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of OB/GYN’s and how they are incorporating the test into clinical practice. Our study shows that most physicians are offering this new, non-invasive technology to their patients, and that their practices were congruent with the literature and available professional society opinions. Those physicians who do not offer NIPT to their patients would like more literature on the topic as well as instructive guidelines from their professional societies. Additionally, this study shows that the practices and attitudes of MFMs and OBs differ. Our population feels that the incorporation of NIPT will change their practices by lowering the amount of invasive procedures, possibly replacing maternal serum screening, and that it will simplify prenatal diagnosis. However, those physicians who do not offer NIPT to their patients are not quite sure how the test will affect their clinical practice. From this study we are able to glean how physicians are incorporating this new technology into their practice and how they feel about the addition to their repertoire of tests. This knowledge gives insight as to how to best move forward with the quickly changing field of prenatal diagnosis.

Translating knowledge into action: Information needs of decision-makers in healthcare

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the healthcare information needs of decision-makers in a local US healthcare setting in efforts to promote the translation of knowledge into action. The focus was on the perceptions and preferences of decision-makers regarding usable information in making decisions as to identify strategies to maximize the contribution of healthcare findings to policy and practice. Methods: This study utilized a qualitative data collection and analysis strategy. Data was collected via open-ended key-informant interviews from a sample of 37 public and private-sector healthcare decision-makers in the Houston/Harris County safety net. The sample was comprised of high-level decision-makers, including legislators, executive managers, service providers, and healthcare funders. Decision-makers were asked to identify the types of information, the level of collaboration with outside agencies, useful attributes of information, and the sources, formats/styles, and modes of information preferred in making important decisions and the basis for their preferences. Results: Decision-makers report acquiring information, categorizing information as usable knowledge, and selecting information for use based on the application of four cross-cutting thought processes or cognitive frameworks. In order of apparent preference, these are time orientation, followed by information seeking directionality, selection of validation processes, and centrality of credibility/reliability. In applying the frameworks, decision-makers are influenced by numerous factors associated with their perceptions of the utility of information and the importance of collaboration with outside agencies in making decisions as well as professional and organizational characteristics. Conclusion: An approach based on the elucidated cognitive framework may be valuable in identifying the reported contextual determinants of information use by decision-makers in US healthcare settings. Such an approach can facilitate active producer/user collaborations and promote the production of mutually valued, comprehensible, and usable findings leading to sustainable knowledge translation efforts long-term.^

Inappropriate imaging utilization in Texas: Geographic variation and predictive factors

Objective::Describe and understand regional differences and associated multilevel factors (patient, provider and regional) to inappropriate utilization of advance imaging tests in the privately insured population of Texas. Methods: We analyzed Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas claims dataset to study the advance imaging utilization during 2008-2010 in the PPO/PPO+ plans. We used three of CMS "Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting" imaging efficiency measures. These included ordering MRI for low back pain without prior conservative management (OP-8) and utilization of combined with and without contrast abdominal CT (OP-10) and thorax CT (OP-11). Means and variation by hospital referral regions (HRR) in Texas were measured and a multilevel logistic regression for being a provider with high values for any the three OP measures was used in the analysis. We also analyzed OP-8 at the individual level. A multilevel logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors for having an inappropriate MRI for low back pain. Results: Mean OP-8 for Texas providers was 37.89%, OP-10 was 29.94% and OP-11 was 9.24%. Variation was higher for CT measure. And certain HRRs were consistently above the mean. Hospital providers had higher odds of high OP-8 values (OP-8: OR, 1.34; CI, 1.12-1.60) but had smaller odds of having high OP-10 and OP-11 values (OP-10: OR, 0.15; CI, 0.12-0.18; OP-11: OR, 0.43; CI, 0.34-0.53). Providers with the highest volume of imaging studies performed, were less likely to have high OP-8 measures (OP-8: OR, 0.58; CI, 0.48-0.70) but more likely to perform combined thoracic CT scans (OP-11: OR, 1.62; CI, 1.34-1.95). Males had higher odds of inappropriate MRI (OR, 1.21; CI, 1.16-1.26). Pattern of care in the six months prior to the MRI event was significantly associated with having an inappropriate MRI. Conclusion::We identified a significant variation in advance imaging utilization across Texas. Type of facility was associated with measure performance, but the associations differ according to the type of study. Last, certain individual characteristics such as gender, age and pattern of care were found to be predictors of inappropriate MRIs.^

Impact of racial differences in medical care on breast cancer survival: Findings from a large nationwide and retrospective cohort study

Background: No studies have attempted to determine whether nodal surgery utilization, time to initiation and completion of chemotherapy or surveillance mammography impact breast cancer survival. ^ Objectives and Methods: To determine whether receipt of nodal surgery, initiation and completion of chemotherapy, and surveillance mammography impact of racial disparities in survival among breast cancer patients in SEER areas, 1992-2005. ^ Results: Adjusting for nodal surgery did not reduce racial disparities in survival. Patients who initiated chemotherapy more than three months after surgery were 1.8 times more likely to die of breast cancer (95% CI 1.3-2.5) compared to those who initiated chemotherapy less than a month after surgery, even after controlling for known confounders or controlling for race. Despite correcting for chemotherapy initiation and completion and known predictors of outcome, African American women still had worse disease specific survival than their Caucasian counterparts. We found that non-whites underwent surveillance mammography less frequently compared with whites and mammography use during a one- or two-year time interval was associated with a small reduced risk of breast-cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. Women who received a mammogram during a two-year interval could expect the same disease-specific survival benefit or overall survival benefit as women who received a mammogram during a one-year interval. We found that while adjustment for surveillance mammography receipt and physician visits reduced differences in mortality between blacks and whites, these survival disparities were eliminated after adjusting for the number of surveillance mammograms received. ^ Conclusions: The disparities in survival among African American and Hispanic women with breast cancer are not explained by nodal surgery utilization or chemotherapy initiation and chemotherapy completion. Surveillance mammograms, physician visits and number of mammograms received may play a major role in achieving equal outcomes for breast cancer-specific mortality for women diagnosed with primary breast cancer. Racial disparities in all-cause mortality were explained by racial differences in surveillance mammograms to certain degree, but were no longer significant after controlling for differences in comorbidity. Focusing on access to quality care and post treatment surveillance might help achieve national goals to eliminate racial disparities in healthcare and outcomes. ^

Journeying Beyond the Balcony to the Block Party and Up to 50,000 Feet: Disparities in Children’s Health and Healthcare

Invited Commentary on “Observations from the Balcony: Directions for Pediatric Health Disparities Research and Policy".

Cost-effectiveness of intensified interventions to control healthcare-associated MRSA infections -- A systematic literature review

Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus healthcare-associated infections (MRSA HAIs) are a major cause of morbidity in hospitalized patients. They pose great economic burden to hospitals caring for these patients. Intensified Interventions aim to control MRSA HAIs. Cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions is largely unclear. We performed a review of cost-effectiveness literature on Intensified Interventions , and provide a summary of study findings, the status of economic research in the area, and information that will help decision-makers at regional level and guide future research.^ We conducted literature search using electronic database PubMed, EBSCO, and The Cochrane Library. We limited our search to English articles published after 1999. We reviewed a total of 1,356 titles, and after applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria selected seven articles for our final review. We modified the Economic Evaluation Abstraction Form provided by CDC, and used this form to abstract data from studies.^ Of the seven selected articles two were cohort studies and the remaining five were modeling studies. They were done in various countries, in different study settings, and with different variations of the Intensified Intervention . Overall, six of the seven studies reported that Intensified Interventions were dominant or at least cost-effective in their study setting. This effect persisted on sensitivity testing.^ We identified many gaps in research in this field. The cost-effectiveness research in the field is mostly composed of modeling studies. The studies do not always clearly describe the intervention. The intervention and infection costs and the sources for these costs are not always explicit or are missing. In modeling studies, there is uncertainty associated with some key model inputs, but these inputs are not always identified. The models utilized in the modeling studies are not always tested for internal consistency or validity. Studies usually test the short term cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions but not the long results.^ Our study limitation was the inability to adjust for differences in study settings, intervention costs, disease costs, or effectiveness measures. Our study strength is the presentation of a focused literature review of Intensified Interventions in hospital settings. Through this study we provide information that will help decision makers at regional level, help guide future research, and might change clinical care and policies. ^

Attitudes and other barriers to the utilization of clinical research findings by American physicians: A systematic review

Background: The Institute of Medicine estimates that only a maximum of 25% of clinical research findings are incorporated into practice by physicians. To improve clinical practice, efforts have been made to promote evidence-based medicine and the use of clinical guidelines. Despite these efforts, the gap between research and clinical practice remains wide.^ Objective: To systematically review the literature describing the factors which influence the use of clinical research recommendations by American physicians.^ Hypothesis: Barriers exist in the application of clinical research into clinical practice, and are multifactorial. The establishment of the Clinical and Translational Awards (CTSA; special federal grants awarded to selected institutions to support clinical and translational research) has reduced the effect of these barriers and improved the process of clinical research translation into practice among American physicians.^ Aims: Identify barriers and facilitators of the use of research findings in clinical practice by American physicians. Contrast studies published six years before and after the creation of the CTSA.^ Methods: The sources of data include published literature from Medline, PubMed and PsycINFO. Selected studies must be qualitative, a survey of American clinicians, based on evidence-based medicine practice, clinical guidelines or treatment pathways. Systematic reviews and reports were excluded, as well as studies with less than 100 respondents.^ Results: In total, 1036 abstracts were reviewed; 115 full text potential articles were identified and reviewed, and a total of 31 studies met all criteria for inclusion in the final review.^ Conclusions: The barriers against the application of clinical research findings, in the forms of clinical guidelines, evidence-based medicine guides and clinical pathways, can be divided broadly into physician barriers, practice/system barriers and patient barriers. Physician barriers are the most common barriers, especially the lack of familiarity with guidelines and the lack of time. Of the factors which improve the use of research based guidelines, physician factors such as younger age, lower duration of clinical practice, specialty training, and practice in large group Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) settings with fewer patients seen were the most commonly cited.^

Intensive care unit utilization among patients with cancer at the end of life

Over the last 2 decades, survival rates in critically ill cancer patients have improved. Despite the increase in survival, the intensive care unit (ICU) continues to be a location where end-of-life care takes place. More than 20% of deaths in the United States occur after admission to an ICU, and as baby boomers reach the seventh and eighth decades of their lives, the volume of patients in the ICU is predicted to rise. The aim of this study was to evaluate intensive care unit utilization among patients with cancer who were at the end of life. End of life was defined using decedent and high-risk cohort study designs. The decedent study evaluated characteristics and ICU utilization during the terminal hospital stay among patients who died at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center during 2003-2007. The high-risk cohort study evaluated characteristics and ICU utilization during the index hospital stay among patients admitted to MD Anderson during 2003-2007 with a high risk of in-hospital mortality. Factors associated with higher ICU utilization in the decedent study included non-local residence, hematologic and non-metastatic solid tumor malignancies, malignancy diagnosed within 2 months, and elective admission to surgical or pediatric services. Having a palliative care consultation on admission was associated with dying in the hospital without ICU services. In the cohort of patients with high risk of in-hospital mortality, patients who went to the ICU were more likely to be younger, male, with newly diagnosed non-metastatic solid tumor or hematologic malignancy, and admitted from the emergency center to one of the surgical services. A palliative care consultation on admission was associated with a decreased likelihood of having an ICU stay. There were no differences in ethnicity, marital status, comorbidities, or insurance status between patients who did and did not utilize ICU services. Inpatient mortality probability models developed for the general population are inadequate in predicting in-hospital mortality for patients with cancer. The following characteristics that differed between the decedent study and high-risk cohort study can be considered in future research to predict risk of in-hospital mortality for patients with cancer: ethnicity, type and stage of malignancy, time since diagnosis, and having advance directives. Identifying those at risk can precipitate discussions in advance to ensure care remains appropriate and in accordance with the wishes of the patient and family.^