Background In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, necessitating an understanding of factors influencing severe disease outcomes. High COVID-19 hospitalization rates underscore the need for robust risk prediction tools to determine estimated risk for future hospitalization for outpatients with COVID-19. We introduced the “COVID-19 Risk Tier Assessment Tool” (CRTAT), designed to enhance clinical decision-making for outpatients. Objective We investigated whether CRTAT offers more accurate risk tier assignments (RTAs) than medical provider insights alone. Methods We assessed COVID-19–positive patients enrolled at Emory Healthcare's Virtual Outpatient Management Clinic (VOMC)—a telemedicine monitoring program, from May 27 through August 24, 2020—who were not hospitalized at the time of enrollment. The primary analysis included patients from this program, who were later hospitalized due to COVID-19. We retroactively formed an age-, gender-, and risk factor–matched group of nonhospitalized patients for comparison. Data extracted from clinical notes were entered into CRTAT. We used descriptive statistics to compare RTAs reported by algorithm–trained health care providers and those produced by CRTAT. Results Our patients were primarily younger than 60 years (67% hospitalized and 71% nonhospitalized). Moderate risk factors were prevalent (hospitalized group: 1 among 11, 52% patients; 2 among 2, 10% patients; and ≥3 among 4, 19% patients; nonhospitalized group: 1 among 11, 52% patients, 2 among 5, 24% patients, and ≥3 among 4, 19% patients). High risk factors were prevalent in approximately 45% (n=19) of the sample (hospitalized group: 11, 52% patients; nonhospitalized: 8, 38% patients). Approximately 83% (n=35) of the sample reported nonspecific symptoms, and the symptoms were generally mild (hospitalized: 12, 57% patients; nonhospitalized: 14, 67% patients). Most patient visits were seen within the first 1-6 days of their illness (n=19, 45%) with symptoms reported as stable over this period (hospitalized: 7, 70% patients; nonhospitalized: 3, 33% patients). Of 42 matched patients (hospitalized: n=21; nonhospitalized: n=21), 26 had identical RTAs and 16 had discrepancies between VOMC providers and CRTAT. Elements that led to different RTAs were as follows: (1) the provider “missed” comorbidity (n=6), (2) the provider noted comorbidity but undercoded risk (n=10), and (3) the provider miscoded symptom severity and course (n=7). Conclusions CRTAT, a point-of-care data entry tool, more accurately categorized patients into risk tiers (particularly those hospitalized), underscored by its ability to identify critical factors in patient history and clinical status. Clinical decision-making regarding patient management, resource allocation, and treatment plans could be enhanced by using similar risk assessment data entry tools for other disease states, such as influenza and community-acquired pneumonia. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of telemedicine, enabling remote patient tools such as CRTAT. Future research should explore the long-term impact of outpatient clinical risk assessment tools and their contribution to better patient care.

Healthcare personnel experienced unprecedented stressors and risk factors for burnout, anxiety, and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. This may have been particularly true for spiritual health clinicians (SHCs), also referred to as healthcare chaplains. We administered a daily pulse survey that allowed SHCs to self-report burnout, depression, and well-being, administered every weekday for the first year of the pandemic. We used a series of linear regression models to evaluate whether burnout, depression, and well-being were associated with local COVID-19 rates in the chaplains’ hospital system (COVID-19 admissions, hospital deaths from COVID-19, and COVID-19 ICU census). We also compared SHC weekly rates with national averages acquired by the U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey (HPS) data during the same timeframe. Of the 840 daily entries from 32 SHCs, 90.0% indicated no symptoms of burnout and 97.1% were below the cutoff for depression. There was no statistically significant relationship between any of the COVID-19 predictors and burnout, depression, or well-being. Mean national PHQ-2 scores were consistently higher than our sample’s biweekly means. Understanding why SHCs were largely protected against burnout and depression may help in addressing the epidemic of burnout among healthcare providers and for preparedness for future healthcare crises.

Introduction: Strong evidence shows lifestyle change and weight loss stimulated by counseling improve glycemic control and lower comorbidities for patients with diabetes, but it is unclear whether diet or physical activity counseling for patients with diabetes in ambulatory settings has actually been responsive to this evidence. Methods: Data from the 2005–2015 National Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys were used to assess trends in provider-reported diet or exercise counseling during ambulatory care visits. The data were pooled and multivariate logistic regression models were built, adjusting for patient-, provider-, and practice-level characteristics to examine whether the provision of counseling varied by these characteristics. Data were analyzed from September 2018 to December 2018. Results: There were 42,234 adults with diabetes and 272,094 adults without diabetes. The proportions of patients with provider-reported Type 2 diabetes who received any diet or exercise counseling were no different over time: 30% in 2005 (95% CI=25%, 35%) and 25% in 2015 (95% CI=18%, 31%). Lower proportions of those without diabetes received any counseling: 17% in 2005 (95% CI=14%, 19%) and 15% in 2015 (95% CI=11%, 18%). Adjusted models showed Hispanic patients had a higher likelihood of receiving diet or exercise counseling, compared with whites (OR=1.38, 95% CI=1.09, 1.75). Those aged 30–49 years were more likely to receive diet or exercise counseling, compared with those aged >75 years (OR=1.51, 95% CI=1.27, 1.80). Compared with rural areas and other providers, visits in a metropolitan area (OR=1.27, 95% CI=1.09, 1.47) or with an advanced practice provider (OR=1.66, 95% CI=1.00, 2.75) had higher likelihood of any diet or exercise counseling delivery. Conclusions: Less than 30% of Americans with diabetes receive diet or exercise counseling in ambulatory visits and this proportion has not changed significantly in a decade. Future interventions should focus on addressing this gap in counseling.

Background-—“Financial toxicity” is a concern for patients, but little is known about how patients consider out-of-pocket cost in decisions. Sacubitril-valsartan provides a contemporary scenario to understand financial toxicity. It is guideline recommended for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, yet out-of-pocket costs can be considerable. Methods and Results-—Structured interviews were conducted with 49 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction at heart failure clinics and inpatient services. Patient opinions of the drug and its value were solicited after description of benefits using graphical displays. Descriptive quantitative analysis of closed-ended responses was conducted, and qualitative descriptive analysis of text data was performed. Of participants, 92% (45/49) said that they would definitely or probably switch to sacubitril-valsartan if their physician recommended it and out-of-pocket cost was $5 more per month than their current medication. Only 43% (21/49) would do so if out-of-pocket cost was $100 more per month (P<0.001). At least 40% across all income categories would be unlikely to take sacubitril-valsartan at $100 more per month. Participants exhibited heterogeneous approaches to cost in decision making and varied on their use and interpretation of probabilistic information. Few (20%) participants stated physicians had initiated a conversation about cost in the past year. Conclusions-—Out-of-pocket cost variation reflective of contemporary cost sharing substantially influenced stated willingness to take sacubitril-valsartan, a guideline-recommended therapy with mortality benefit. These findings suggest a need for cost transparency to promote shared decision making. They also demonstrate the complexity of cost discussion and need to study how to incorporate out-of-pocket cost into clinical decisions.

Background: Individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have persistent symptoms following their acute illness. The prevalence and predictors of these symptoms, termed postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; PASC), have not been fully described. Methods: Participants discharged from an outpatient telemedicine program for COVID-19 were emailed a survey (1-6 months after discharge) about ongoing symptoms, acute illness severity, and quality of life. Standardized telemedicine notes from acute illness were used for covariates (comorbidities and provider-assessed symptom severity). Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed to assess predictors of persistent symptoms. Results: Two hundred ninety patients completed the survey, of whom 115 (39.7%) reported persistent symptoms including fatigue (n=59, 20.3%), dyspnea on exertion (n=41, 14.1%), and mental fog (n=39, 13.5%), among others. The proportion of persistent symptoms did not differ based on duration since illness (<90 days: N=32, 37.2%; vs>90 days: N=80, 40.4%; P=.61). Predictors of persistent symptoms included provider-assessed moderate-severe illness (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.24; 95% CI, 1.75-6.02), female sex (aOR, 1.99; 95% CI, 0.98-4.04; >90 days out: AOR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.01-4.95), and middle age (aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.07-4.03). Common symptoms associated with reports of worse physical health included weakness, fatigue, myalgias, and mental fog. Conclusions: Symptoms following acute COVID-19 are common and may be predicted by factors during the acute phase of illness. Fatigue and neuropsychiatric symptoms figured prominently. Select symptoms seem to be particularly associated with perceptions of physical health following COVID-19 and warrant specific attention on future studies of PASC.

Background. Presenting numeric data alone may result in patients underappreciating clinically significant benefits. Contextualizing statements to counter this may raise concern about absence of neutrality. These issues arose during construction of a decision aid for sacubitril-valsartan, a heart failure medication associated with a ∼3% absolute reduction in 2-year mortality that carries high out-of-pocket cost. A contextualizing statement framing this as a “pretty big benefit” was incorporated. The impact of statements like this within decision aids is unknown. Objective. This online Qualtrics survey sought to deepen understanding of benefit framing by testing the impact of varying contextualizing statements within a decision aid for sacubitril-valsartan. Design. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one of six abbreviated versions of a decision aid for sacubitril-valsartan that varied only by contextualizing statement (ranging from strongly neutral to strongly positive and using relative and absolute risk reductions). Participants were asked to answer questions regarding the likelihood of taking the medication at a cost of $50/month and their perception of the drug’s benefits. Results. A total of 1873 participants who were demographically similar to the heart failure population completed the survey. Fifty-four percent were willing to take sacubitril-valsartan at $50/month. Each of the five experimental contextualizing statements was compared with the baseline version; no significant differences were observed in reported likelihood of taking sacubitril-valsartan. After controlling for demographics and covariates, group assignment did not predict likelihood of taking the medication. Higher income, better self-reported health status, and younger age were associated with increased likelihood of taking sacubitril-valsartan. Limitations. This study used a hypothetical scenario and evaluated one method of delivering contextualizing statements. Conclusions. Contextualizing statements as tested within this decision aid did not affect decision making.

Background: Care coordination is an essential and difficult to measure function of primary care. Objective: Our objective was to assess the impact of network characteristics in primary/specialty physician networks on emergency department (ED) visits for patients with chronic ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs). Subjects and Measures: This cross-sectional social network analysis of primary care and specialty physicians caring for adult Medicaid beneficiaries with ACSCs was conducted using 2009 Texas Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) files. Network characteristic measures were the main exposure variables. A negative binomial regression model analyzed the impact of network characteristics on the ED visits per patient in the panel. Results: There were 42 493 ACSC patients assigned to 5687 primary care physicians (PCPs) connected to 11 660 specialist physicians. PCPs whose continuity patients did not visit a specialist had 86% fewer ED visits per patient in their panel, compared with PCPs whose patients saw specialists. Among PCPs connected to specialists in the network, those with a higher number of specialist collaborators and those with a high degree of centrality had lower patient panel ED rates. Conclusions: PCPs providing comprehensive care (ie, without specialist consultation) for their patients with chronic ACSCs had lower ED utilization rates than those coordinating care with specialists. PCPs with robust specialty networks and a high degree of centrality in the network also had lower ED utilization. The right fit between comprehensiveness of primary care, care coordination, and adequate capacity of specialty availability in physician networks is needed to drive outcomes.

Objective: To measure changes in micronutrient adequacy and diet quality in healthcare and university employees who underwent a 10-week teaching kitchen program. Methods: Thirty-eight healthcare and university employees participated in a 10-week teaching kitchen program. Twenty-seven completed self-administered, 24-hour dietary recalls to measure dietary intake at baseline and 3-months. Micronutrient adequacy and diet quality was assessed using Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) and the Healthy Eating Index (HEI). Results: Seventy percent of participants were classified as low or moderate micronutrient adequacy at baseline. The proportion of participants with high micronutrient adequacy increased from 30% to 48% at 3-month follow-up. Total HEI and most HEI components increased at follow-up; with a statistically significant increase in seafood/plant protein score (P =.007). Conclusions and Implications for Practice: Our results suggest an inadequacy in micronutrient intake in university and healthcare employees and that teaching kitchens may help improve micronutrient adequacy and diet quality.

Background: COVID-19 concerns remain among health care providers, as there are few outpatient treatment options. In the early days of the pandemic, treatment options for nonhospitalized patients were limited, and symptomatic treatment and home-grown guidelines that used recommendations from the Global Initiative for Asthma Management and Treatment were used. Objective: The possibility that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) might reduce the risk of respiratory symptoms and promote recovery was the impetus for this review, as it has already been shown that in the nonhospitalized patient population, oral corticosteroids (OCS) in the acute phase could have an adverse effect on recovery. We investigated if (1) patients treated with ICS were less likely to require referral to a post-COVID-19 clinic or pulmonary specialist than patients without ICS treatment or with OCS therapy, and (2) if OCS use was associated with worse health outcomes. Methods: In a retrospective chart review, we identified all patients with acute illness due to COVID-19 that were followed and managed by a telemedicine clinic team between June and December 2020. The data were electronically pulled from electronic medical records through April 2021 and reviewed to determine which patients eventually required referral to a post-COVID-19 clinic or pulmonary specialist due to persistent respiratory symptoms of COVID-19. The data were then analyzed to compare outcomes between patients prescribed OCS and those prescribed ICS. We specifically looked at patients treated acutely with ICS or OCS that then required referral to a pulmonary specialist or post-COVID-19 clinic. We excluded any patients with a history of chronic OCS or ICS use for any reason. Results: Prescribing ICS during the acute phase did not reduce the possibility of developing persistent symptoms. There was no difference in the referral rate to a pulmonary specialist or post-COVID-19 clinic between patients treated with OCS versus ICS. However, our data may not be generalizable to other populations, as it represents a patient population enrolled in a telemedicine program at a single center. Conclusions: We found that ICS, as compared to OCS, did not reduce the risk of developing persistent respiratory symptoms. This finding adds to the body of knowledge that ICS and OCS medications remain potent treatments in patients with acute and postacute COVID-19 seen in an outpatient setting.

Dementia is a stigmatizing condition requiring enhanced awareness and understanding. Churches are a trusted source of support for African Americans, a demographic disproportionately affected by dementia. However, many African American churches are not equipped with the knowledge and means to provide safe environments, resources, and spiritual and social support for their parishioners living with dementia and their families. This protocol is written to detail the design and implementation of a nurse-led, dementia-friendly congregation program, Alter. The Alter program was developed to increase dementia awareness, develop a supportive, faith-based dementia-friendly infrastructure, and create a community supporting the well-being of African Americans living with dementia and their families. Engagement in this program aims to improve brain health status of older adults, improve physical and mental health outcomes, reduce dementia stigma, and enhance personal agency. Improved outcomes for persons living with dementia translate into lower use of acute and emergency services due to more stability in community care. It is expected that the churches participating in this program will be recognized by their community as a great resource for dementia information and support. The long-term goal of the Alter program is to be widely adapted in various health systems to reduce health disparities associated with dementia in the African American community.