BackgroundHealthcare providers play a critical role in facilitating patient access to medical cannabis. However, previous surveys suggest only a minority of providers believe that medical cannabis confers benefits to patients. Significant new knowledge about the potential benefits and harms of medical cannabis has recently emerged. Understanding current attitudes and beliefs of providers may provide insight into the ongoing challenges they face as states expand access to medical cannabis.MethodsWe conducted an electronic survey of primary care providers in a large Minnesota-based healthcare system between January 23 and February 5, 2018. We obtained information about provider characteristics, attitudes and beliefs about medical cannabis, provider comfort level in answering patient questions about medical cannabis, and whether providers were interested in receiving additional education.ResultsSixty-two providers completed the survey (response rate 31%; 62/199). Seventy-six percent of respondents were physicians and the average age was 46.3 years. A majority of providers believed (“strongly agree” or “somewhat agree”) that medical cannabis was a legitimate medical therapy (58.1%) and 38.7% believed that providers should be offering to patients for managing medical conditions. A majority (> 50%) of providers believed that medical cannabis was helpful for treating the qualifying medical conditions of cancer, terminal illness, and intractable pain. A majority of providers did not know if medical cannabis was effective for managing nearly one-half of the other state designated qualifying medical conditions. Few believed that medical cannabis improved quality of life domains. Over one-third of providers believed that medical cannabis interacted with medical therapies. One-half of providers were not ready to or did not want to answer patient questions about medical cannabis, and the majority of providers wanted to learn more about it.ConclusionsHealthcare providers generally believe that medical cannabis is a legitimate medical therapy. Provider knowledge gaps about the effectiveness of medical cannabis for state designated qualifying conditions need to be addressed, and accurate information about the potential for drug interactions needs to be disseminated to address provider concerns. Clinical trial data about how medical cannabis improves patient quality of life domains is desperately needed as this information can impact clinical decision-making.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0906-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background Bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab are authorized for treatment of high-risk patients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). We compared the outcomes of patients who received these therapies to identify factors associated with hospitalization and other clinical outcomes. Methods Adult patients who received monoclonal antibody from November 19, 2020 to February 11, 2021 were selected and divided into those who received bamlanivimab (n=2747) and casirivimab-imdevimab (n=849). The 28-day all-cause and COVID-19-related hospitalizations were compared between the groups. Results The population included 3596 patients; median age was 62 years; and 50% were female. All had ≥1 medical comorbidity; 55% had multiple comorbidities. All cause- and COVID-19-related hospitalization rates at 28 days were 3.98% and 2.56%, respectively. After adjusting for medical comorbidities, there was no significant difference in all cause- and COVID-19-related hospitalization rates between bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab (adjusted HR, 1.4, 95% CI 0.9-2.2 and 1.6, 95% CI 0.8-2.7, respectively). Chronic kidney, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and immunocompromised status were associated with higher likelihood of hospitalization. Conclusion This observational study on the use of bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab in high-risk patients showed similarly low rates of hospitalization. The number and type of medical comorbidities are associated with hospitalizations after monoclonal antibody treatment.
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide information on how health care affects patient health and well-being and represent a patient-centered approach. Despite this potential, PROs are not widely used in clinical settings. Semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 3 stakeholder groups (patients, providers, and health care administrators) to determine the top 5 perceived barriers and benefits of PRO implementation. The Delphi technique was employed to obtain consensus and rank order responses. Patients perceived survey length to be important, whereas providers and administrators perceived time to collect data and patient health literacy, respectively, as the greatest barriers to PRO implementation. The greatest perceived benefits were the ability to track changes in clinical symptoms over time, improved quality of care, and better disease control among patients, providers, and administrators, respectively. These results may guide the development of novel frameworks for PRO implementation by addressing perceived barriers and building on the perceived benefits to encourage adoption of PROs.
Rationale Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, and consequent social distancing directives have been observed to negatively impact social relationships but the impact of these changes on the quality of social relationships at a population level has not been explored. Objective To evaluate changes in social relationships in a U.S. population sample during a time of social distancing. Methods We deployed a matched, longitudinal survey design of the National Institutes of Health Adult Social Relationship Scales to assess the social aspects of emotional support, instrumental support, friendship, loneliness, perceived hostility, and perceived rejection from a time without social distancing (February 2018) to a time where social distancing directives were active (May 2020). Changes in social relationships were compared using paired t-tests, and generalized linear regression models were constructed to identify subpopulations experiencing differential changes in each subdomain of social relationships during social distancing. Results Within our sample population, individuals experienced an increased sense of emotional support, instrumental support, and loneliness, and decreased feelings of friendship and perceived hostility during a period of social distancing. Individuals with low self-rated health experienced a decreased sense of emotional support, and females experienced increased feelings of loneliness compared with males. Conclusions Social distancing measurably impacts social relationships and may have a disproportionate impact on females and individuals with lower self-rated health. If novel emergent infectious diseases become more commonplace, social interventions may be needed to mitigate the potential adverse impact of social distancing on social relationships.
Background The clinical outcomes of patients who decline anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is not known. Factors associated with the decision to accept or decline the offer for anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies are not established. This study aimed to identify factors impacting the decision to consent for monoclonal antibody therapies and assess the differences in clinical outcomes of patients who accepted compared to those who declined these therapies. Methods This retrospective cohort study enrolled 2820 adult patients who were offered monoclonal antibody therapies, bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab, for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic in the Midwest between 11/19/2020 and 12/31/2020. The primary endpoint is the decision to accept or decline monoclonal antibody treatment. Secondary endpoints were patient-level factors that could have impacted the decision to accept treatment (age, gender, race, ethnicity, primary language spoken, and medical comorbidities). The main clinical endpoint was hospitalization within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results 59.1% (n = 1669) chose to accept monoclonal antibody therapy, and 40.9% (n = 1151) chose to decline the offer for treatment. Patients were more likely to accept treatment if they were non-Hispanic White, English speaking, identified a spouse or life partner, had a religious affiliation, and possessed more medical comorbidities. Overall, 28-day hospitalization rate was 2.6% (n = 72/2820) and was higher among those who declined (3.3%) than those who accepted monoclonal antibody therapy (2.0%; Rate Ratio = 0.62, 95% Confidence Interval, 0.39-0.98). Conclusions Despite having more comorbidities, patients who accepted monoclonal antibody treatments had a lower rate of hospitalization compared to patients who declined treatment. Several social and cultural factors were associated with the decision to decline therapy, including race, language, ethnicity, and lack of social support. These findings can inform public health efforts to reduce social disparities in the treatment of COVID-19 and increase utilization of monoclonal antibody therapies in high risk populations.
Introduction Telehealth service provision has accelerated during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. As the pandemic continues, clinical practices have discovered ways to resume operations. Opportunities exist to understand patient preferences for telehealth clinical services and to tailor offerings to different demographic groups. Methods We conducted a survey of patients receiving telehealth services through our outpatient practice to understand the types of healthcare services for which patients report preferences for telehealth. Results We received 551 survey responses (response rate = 20.8%; 551/2650). More than half of patients indicated being ‘very likely’ to use telehealth services to refill medication(s) (67.3%), prepare for an upcoming visit (66.1%), review test results (60.3%), or receive education (54.2%). Males had lower odds of preferring telehealth services for reviewing test results (odds ratio (OR) = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.34–0.94) or mental health issues (OR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.38–0.77). Respondents who received a video visit were significantly more likely than those who received a telephone visit to report preferences for using telehealth for education, care plan discussions, long-term health issues, and mental health. Discussion Patient preferences for telehealth services vary by services provided and respondent demographics. Experience with telehealth increases the likelihood for future use of these services.
Background: News articles, commentaries, and opinion articles have suggested that ongoing social distancing measures coupled with economic challenges during COVID-19 may worsen stress, affective state, and substance use across the globe. We sought to advance our understanding of the differences between individuals who change their substance use patterns during a public health crisis and those who do not. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of young adults (18–25 years of age) assessing respondent characteristics and vaping, tobacco, alcohol, and/or marijuana use. We calculated prevalence estimates, prevalence changes, and prevalence ratios with associated 95% confidence intervals and looked for differences with the chi-square test. Results: Of the total sample, 53.2% ( n = 542/1018) young adults reported vaping or using tobacco, alcohol, and/or marijuana. Among the 542 respondents reporting use, 34.3% reported a change in their use patterns. Among respondents reporting changes in substance use patterns during the pandemic ( n = 186), 68.8% reported an increase in alcohol use, 44.0% reported a decrease in vaping product use, and 47.3% reported a decrease in tobacco product use due to COVID-19. Substance use changed significantly for respondents with increasing degree of loneliness (continuous loneliness score: prevalence ratio = 1.12, 95% confidence interval = 1.01–1.25), anxiety (prevalence ratio = 1.45, 95% confidence interval = 1.14–1.85), and depression (prevalence ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval = 1.13–1.82). Conclusion: Self-reported substance use among young adults was observed to change during a pandemic, and the degree of loneliness appears to impact these changes. Innovative strategies are needed to address loneliness, anxiety, depression, and substance use during global health crises that impact social contact.
Objective: To use a mixed methods approach to focus quality improvement efforts to enhance patient experience through human-centered design.
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.