Objectives To test the diagnostic accuracy of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended food insecurity screener. Methods We conducted prospective diagnostic accuracy studies between July and November 2016, in Chicago, Illinois. We recruited convenience samples of adults from adult and pediatric emergency departments (12-month recall study: n|=|188; 30-day recall study: n|=|154). A self-administered survey included the 6-item Household Food Security Screen (gold standard), the validated 2-item Hunger Vital Sign (HVS; often, sometimes, never response categories), and the 2-item AAP tool (yes-or-no response categories). Results Food insecurity was prevalent (12-month recall group: 46%; 30-day group: 39%). Sensitivity of the AAP tool using 12-month and 30-day recall was, respectively, 76% (95% confidence interval [CI]|=|65%, 85%) and 72% (95% CI|=|57%, 84%). The HVS sensitivity was significantly higher than the AAP tool (12-month: 94% [95% CI|=|86%, 98%; P|=|.002]; 30-day: 92% [95% CI|=|79%, 98%; P|=|.02]). Conclusions The AAP tool missed nearly a quarter of food-insecure adults screened in the hospital; the HVS screening tool was more sensitive. Public health implications Health care systems adopting food insecurity screening should optimize ease of administration and sensitivity of the screening tool.

Background: Patient experiences with health care have been widely used as benchmark indicators of quality for providers, health care practices, and health plans.Objective: The objective of this study was to summarize the literature regarding the associations between Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) patient experiences and clinical and quality outcomes.Research Design: A systematic review of the literature was completed using PubMed, Embase, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature on December 14, 2019. Separate searches were conducted to query terms identifying CAHPS surveys with clinical and quality outcomes of care. Two reviewers completed all components of the search process.Study Selection: Studies investigating associations between CAHPS composite ratings and health care sensitive clinical outcomes or quality measures of care were included in this review. Studies were excluded if they did not investigate patient experiences using CAHPS composite ratings or if CAHPS composites were not treated as the independent variable.Results: Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria, 10 investigating associations of CAHPS composite ratings with clinical outcomes and 9 investigating these associations with quality measures. Patientprovider communication was the most studied CAHPS composite rating and was significantly associated with self-reported physical and mental health, frequency of emergency room visits and inpatient hospital stays, hospitalization length, and CAHPS personal physician global ratings.Conclusions: Ratings of patient experience with care may influence clinical and quality outcomes of care. However, key inconsistencies between studies affirm that more research is needed to solidify this conclusion and investigate how patient experiences differentially relate to outcomes for various patient groups.

Aim: A retrospective chart review of ibrutinib-treated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was conducted. Patients & methods: Adults with CLL who initiated ibrutinib were followed for ≥6 months (n = 180). Results: Twenty-five percent of first-line ibrutinib patients experienced ≥1 dose reduction, mainly due to adverse events (AEs; 79%). Treatment discontinuations and dose holds occurred in 20 and 34% of patients, respectively, most commonly due to AEs (73 and 74%). Approximately one-quarter of relapsed/refractory ibrutinib patients experienced ≥1 dose reduction, mainly due to AEs (88%). Treatment discontinuation and dose holds occurred in 40% of patients (58 and 76% due to AEs, respectively). Conclusion: Dose reductions, holds and discontinuations were frequent in patients with CLL receiving ibrutinib in routine clinical practice.

Emergency department (ED) visits for psychiatric care in the US reportedly declined during the COVID-19 pandemic. This work, however, does not control for strong temporal patterning in visits before the pandemic and does not examine a potential “rebound” in demand for psychiatric care following the relaxation of initial societal restrictions. Here, we examine COVID-19-related perturbations in psychiatric care during and after the 1st stage of societal restrictions in the largest safety-net hospital in Los Angeles. We retrieved psychiatric ED visit data (98,888 total over 156 weeks, Jan 2018 to Dec 2020) from Los Angeles County + USC Medical Center. We applied interrupted time series methods to identify and control for autocorrelation in psychiatric ED visits before examining their relation with the 1st stage of societal restrictions (i.e., March 13 to May 8, 2020), as well as the subsequent “rebound” period of relaxed restrictions (i.e., after May 8, 2020). Psychiatric ED visits fell by 78.13 per week (i.e., 12%) during the 1st stage of societal restrictions (SD = 23.99, p < 0.01). Reductions in ED visits for alcohol use, substance use, and (to a lesser extent) anxiety disorders accounted for the overall decline. After the 1st stage of societal restrictions, however, we observe no “rebound” above expected values in psychiatric ED visits overall (coef = − 16.89, SD = 20.58, p = 0.41) or by diagnostic subtype. This pattern of results does not support speculation that, at the population level, foregoing ED care during initial societal restrictions subsequently induced a psychiatric “pandemic” of urgent visits.

Objective To determine whether Latino undocumented immigrants had a steeper decline in Emergency Department (ED) utilization compared to Latino Medi-Cal patients in a Los Angeles safety-net hospital, March 13, 2020, to May 8, 2020. Study Design The data were extracted from patient medical records for ED visits at LAC + USC Medical Center from January 2018 to September 2020. We analyzed weekly ED encounters among undocumented Latino patients in the nine-week period after COVID was declared a national emergency. We applied time-series routines to identify and remove autocorrelation in ED encounters before examining its relation with the COVID-19 pandemic. We included Latino patients 18 years of age and older who were either on restricted or full-scope Medi-Cal (n = 230,195). Results All low-income Latino patients, regardless of immigration status, experienced a significant decline in ED utilization during the first nine weeks of the pandemic. Undocumented patients, however, experienced an even steeper decline. ED visits for this group fall below expected levels between March 13, 2020, and May 8, 2020 (coef. =  − 38.67; 95% CI =  − 71.71, − 5.63). When applied to the weekly mean of ED visits, this translates to a 10% reduction below expected levels in ED visits during this time period. Conclusion Undocumented immigrants’ health care utilization was influenced by external events that occurred early in the pandemic, such as strict stay-at-home orders and the public charge rule change. Health care institutions and local policy efforts could work to ensure that hospitals are safer spaces for undocumented immigrants to receive care without immigration concerns.