Background Despite the 2013 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations, Hepatitis C (HCV) screening rates among patients born between 1945-1965 has remained below 25% (MacLean, 2018). At our outpatient academic suburban primary care practice in Albany County, NY, our hepatitis C baseline prior to interventions was 31.75%. In collaboration with Project FOCUS through Gilead, our practice attempted to increase screening rates among this birth cohort. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review on patients eligible for HCV screening with birth years 1945-1965 at the time of their visit at the Albany Med Internal Medicine/Pediatrics practice. We report monthly HCV screening from January 2018 to April 2020. In addition, we determined whether HCV screening rates differed by race, gender, ethnicity, private vs public insurance, and risk stratification or RAF (standard vs. high-risk patient). Results The chance that a test conducted for eligible patients increased from 29.9% (pre-intervention) to 58.76% in 2019 (post-intervention). From June 2019- December 2019, the testing rates were consistently above the 2019 average (Figure 1). There were no significant differences in HCV screening due to gender, race, ethnicity, or type of insurance (Table 1). Figure 1. Hepatitis C Screening Rates at an Outpatient Medicine/Pediatrics Practice 2018-2020 Table 1. Demographics - Hepatitis C Screening Rates Conclusion In this outpatient Med/Peds practice, hepatitis C screening rates increased dramatically after incorporation of an EMR prompt, as well as nursing-generated orders for patients due for screening. There was no statistical difference in screening based on race, ethnicity, gender, or insurance type. Of note, high-risk patients were more likely to be screened, perhaps as they receive more case management services and are more likely to be in the office, increasing the opportunities for screening. The next step would be to adapt these interventions to screening all patients age 18-79, as per the updated 2020 USPSTF guidelines. Disclosures Danielle P. Wales, MD, MPH, Gilead (Grant/Research Support) Abigale Eichelman, MA, Gilead FOCUS Foundation (Other Financial or Material Support, Employee of Albany Medical Center with Salary Support on Grant) Ashar Ata, MD, MPH, PHD, GILEAD FOCUS Foundation (Grant/Research Support) Michael Waxman, MD, MPH, Gilead FOCUS Foundation (Grant/Research Support)
BackgroundHuman granulocytic anaplasmosis (HGA) is an increasingly common tickborne infection in the North-East United States. Statewide incidence of human cases of anaplasmosis in New York (excluding New York City) increased 407% from 2010–2017, with a corresponding increase in Anaplasma phagocytophilum prevalence in ticks. While previous observational studies have described the clinical features of HGA, there has been little documentation of HGA diagnosed in the emergency department (ED) setting.MethodsDemographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic records of cases with a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for HGA or the closely related clinical entity ehrlichiosis from 2016 to 2017. HGA and ehrlichiosis PCR were performed by the Albany Medical Center laboratory on patients treated in the ED. Basic descriptive analyses were performed.ResultsDuring the 2-year period, there were 37 cases of PCR-positive HGA and four cases of PCR-positive ehrlichiosis treated in the ED. Electronic data were available for extraction for 40 of these cases. Mean age was 54 years old (range 7–94 years). Thirty-four (85%) patients presented with fever, and 9 (23%) reported a tick bite or tick exposure. Twenty-two (55%) patients had leukopenia; 32 (80%) thrombocytopenia; 26 (65%) hyponatremia; 24 (60%) elevated transaminases; 38 (95%) at least one of these laboratory abnormality; and 13 (33%) all four laboratory abnormalities. Twenty-four patients (60%) were given the empiric diagnosis of a tickborne illness upon disposition from the ED, with 19 (48%) patients admitted to the hospital.ConclusionTo our knowledge, this study represents the first description of patients diagnosed with HGA (and ehrlichiosis) in the ED setting. Because of the inherent testing bias, further study is needed to establish the true ED prevalence of HGA in highly endemic regions. Notably, only 23% reported either a tick bite or tick exposure, highlighting the need to consider this for diagnosis in patients presenting to the ED with consistent symptoms and laboratory findings in endemic areas. Further study might explore whether there exists a collection of laboratory findings that could accurately identify HGA in ED patients.Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.