This Research Letter describes the increasing trend of almost-constant social media use among California adolescents and the association with serious psychological distress, focusing on the influence of familial and experiential factors.

Introduction

The association between exposure to extremely low-frequency electric and magnetic fields (ELF) and childhood leukemia has led to the classification of magnetic fields by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a "possible human carcinogen." This association is regarded as the critical effect in risk assessment. Creating effective policy in light of widespread exposure and the undisputed value of safe, reliable, and economic electricity to society is difficult and requires estimates of the potential public health impact and associated uncertainties.

Objectives

Although a causal relationship between magnetic fields and childhood leukemia has not been established, we present estimates of the possible pubic health impact using attributable fractions to provide a potentially useful input into policy analysis under different scenarios.

Methods

Using ELF exposure distributions from various countries and dose-response functions from two pooled analyses, we calculate country-specific and worldwide estimates of attributable fractions (AFs) and attributable cases.

Results

Even given a wide range of assumptions, we find that the AF remains < 10%, with point estimates ranging from < 1% to about 4%. For small countries with low exposure, the number of attributable cases is less than one extra case per year. Worldwide the range is from 100 to 2,400 cases possibly attributable to ELF exposure.

Conclusion

The fraction of childhood leukemia cases possibly attributable to ELF exposure across the globe appears to be small. There remain, however, a number of uncertainties in these AF estimates, particularly in the exposure distributions.

BACKGROUND: Misdiagnosis may be a significant and under-recognized quality of care problem. In birthing facilities located in anurban Philippine setting, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy for three obstetric conditions: cephalopelvic disproportion (CPD), post-partum hemorrhage (PPH), and pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: Identical simulated cases were used to measure diagnostic accuracy for every provider (n=103). We linked misdiagnosis - identified by the simulated cases - to obstetrical complications of the patients at the participating facilities. Patient-level data on health outcomes and costs were obtained from medical records and follow-home in-person interviews. RESULTS: The prevalence of misdiagnosis among obstetric providers was 29.8% overall, 25% for CPD, 33% for PPH, and 31% for pre-eclampsia. Linking provider decision-making to patients, we found those who misdiagnosed the simulated cases were more likely to have patients with a complication (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.39-3.77) compared with those who did not misdiagnose. Complicated patients were significantly less likely to be referred to a hospital immediately, were more likely to be readmitted to a hospital after delivery, had significantly higher medical costs, and lost more income than non-complicated patients. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis is arguably the most important task a clinician performs because it determines the subsequent course of evaluation and treatment, with the direct and indirect costs of diagnostic error, placing large financial burdens on the patient.

Policy Points Despite decades of research exposing health disparities between populations and communities in the US, health equity goals remain largely unfulfilled. We argue these failures call for applying an equity lens in the way we approach data systems, from collection and analysis to interpretation and distribution. Hence, health equity requires data equity. There is notable federal interest in policy changes and federal investments to improve health equity. With this, we outline the opportunities to align these health equity goals with data equity by improving the way communities are engaged and how population data are collected, analyzed, interpreted, made accessible, and distributed. Policy priority areas for data equity include increasing the use of disaggregated data, increasing the use of currently underused federal data, building capacity for equity assessments, developing partnerships between government and community, and increasing data accountability to the public.

Improving clinical performance using measurement and payment incentives, including pay for performance (or P4P), has, so far, shown modest to no benefit on patient outcomes. Our objective was to assess the impact of a P4P programme on paediatric health outcomes in the Philippines. We used data from the Quality Improvement Demonstration Study. In this study, the P4P intervention, introduced in 2004, was randomly assigned to 10 community district hospitals, which were matched to 10 control sites. At all sites, physician quality was measured using Clinical Performance Vignettes (CPVs) among randomly selected physicians every 6 months over a 36-month period. In the hospitals randomized to the P4P intervention, physicians received bonus payments if they met qualifying scores on the CPV. We measured health outcomes 4-10 weeks after hospital discharge among children 5 years of age and under who had been hospitalized for diarrhoea and pneumonia (the two most common illnesses affecting this age cohort) and had been under the care of physicians participating in the study. Health outcomes data collection was done at baseline/pre-intervention and 2 years post-intervention on the following post-discharge outcomes: (1) age-adjusted wasting, (2) C-reactive protein in blood, (3) haemoglobin level and (4) parental assessment of child's health using general self-reported health (GSRH) measure. To evaluate changes in health outcomes in the control vs intervention sites over time (baseline vs post-intervention), we used a difference-in-difference logistic regression analysis, controlling for potential confounders. We found an improvement of 7 and 9 percentage points in GSRH and wasting over time (post-intervention vs baseline) in the intervention sites relative to the control sites (P ≤ 0.001). The results from this randomized social experiment indicate that the introduction of a performance-based incentive programme, which included measurement and feedback, led to improvements in two important child health outcomes.

OBJECTIVES:To estimate potential impacts of California Assembly Bill (AB) 1316: a requirement for universal screening and insurance coverage for child blood lead testing. METHODS:In April 2017 the California Health Benefits Review Program (Oakland, CA) analyzed AB 1316 for the California legislature, including a systematic review of lead screening effectiveness, commercial insurer surveys regarding screening coverage, and actuarial utilization and cost implication assessments. RESULTS:Universal screening requirements would increase child lead testing by 273%, raise affected populations' premiums by 0.0043%, and detect an additional 4777 exposed children 1 year after implementation. CONCLUSIONS:The evidence for a net societal benefit of universal screening approach is limited and is not supported by prominent medical professional groups. Public Health Implications. California expanded targeted screening to identify additional children at higher risk for lead poisoning on the basis of California-specific risk factors, while mitigating the potential harms of universal screening such as an increase in false positive tests and health care costs.

This cross-sectional study examines the association of avoidance of public programs among California immigrants with delayed access to health care services and prescriptions owing to concerns about how their interaction with these services may affect their immigration status.

BACKGROUND: Should health systems invest more in access to care by expanding insurance coverage or in health care services including improving the quality of care? Comparing these options experimentally would shed light on the impact and cost-effectiveness of these strategies. METHODS: The Quality Improvement Demonstration Study (QIDS) was a randomized policy experiment conducted across 30 districts in the Philippines. The study had a control group and two policy intervention groups intended to improve the health of young children. The demand-side intervention in QIDS was universal health insurance coverage (UHC) for children aged 5 years or younger, and a supply-side intervention, a pay-for-performance (P4P) bonus for all providers who met pre-determined quality levels. In this paper, we compare the impacts of these policies from the QIDS experiment on childhood wasting by calculating DALYs averted per US$spent. RESULTS: The direct per capita costs to implement UHC and P4P are US$4.08 and US$1.98 higher, respectively, compared to control. DALYs due to wasting were reduced by 334,862 in UHC and 1,073,185 in P4P. When adjustments are made for the efficiency of higher quality, the DALYS averted per US$ spent is similar in the two arms, 1.56 and 1.58 for UHC and P4P, respectively. Since the P4P quality improvements touches all patients seen by qualifying providers (32% in UHC versus 100% in P4P), there is a larger reduction in DALYs. With similar programmatic costs for either intervention, in this study, each US$spent under P4P yielded 1.52 DALYs averted compared to the standard program, while UHC yielded only a 0.50 DALY reduction. CONCLUSION: P4P had a greater impact and was more cost-effective compared to UHC as measured by DALYs averted. While expanded insurance benefit ceilings affected only those who are covered, P4P incentivizes practice quality improvement regardless of whether children are insured or uninsured.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether a measurement and feedback system led to improvements in adherence to clinical pathways. DESIGN: The M-QURE (Moffitt-Quality, Understanding, Research and Evidence) Initiative was introduced in 2012 to enhance and improve adherence to pathways at Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC) in three broad clinical areas: breast, lung and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. M-QURE used simulated patient vignettes based on MCCs Clinical Pathways to benchmark clinician adherence and monitor change over three rounds of implementation. SETTING: MCC, located in Tampa, Florida, a National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center. PARTICIPANTS: Three non-overlapping cohorts at MCC (one each in breast, lung and GI) totalling 48 providers participated in this study, with each member of the multidisciplinary team (composed of medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgeons and advanced practice providers) invited to participate. INTERVENTIONS: Each participant was asked to complete a set of simulated patient vignettes over three rounds within their own cancer specialty. Participants were required to complete all assigned vignettes over each of the three rounds, or they would be excluded from this study. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Increased domain and overall provider care adherence to clinical pathways, as scored by blinded physician abstractors. RESULTS: We found significant improvements in pathway adherence between the third and first rounds of data collection particularly for workup and treatment of cancer cases. By clinical grouping, breast improved by 13.6% (p<0.001), and lung improved by 12.1% (p<0.001) over baseline, whereas GI showed a decrease of 1.4% (p=0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pathway adherence improved in a short timeframe for breast and lung cancers using group-level measurement and individual feedback. This suggests that a measurement and feedback programme may be a useful tool to improve clinical pathway adherence.

Background

Real-time, rapid assessment of barriers to care experienced by patients can be used to inform relevant health care legislation. In recent years, online communities have become a source of support for patients as well as a vehicle for discussion and collaboration among patients, clinicians, advocates, and researchers. The Breast Cancer Social Media (#BCSM) community has hosted weekly Twitter chats since 2011. Topics vary each week, and chats draw a diverse group of participants. Partnering with the #BCSM community, we used Twitter to gather data on barriers to care for patients with metastatic breast cancer and potential policy solutions. Metastatic breast cancer survival rates are low and in large part conditioned by time-sensitive access to care factors that might be improved through policy changes.

Objective

This study was part of an assessment of the barriers to care for metastatic breast cancer with the goal of offering policy solutions for the legislative session in California.

Methods

We provided 5 questions for a chat specific to metastatic breast cancer care barriers and potential policy solutions. These were discussed during the course of a #BCSM chat on November 18, 2019. We used Symplur (Symplur LLC) analytics to generate a transcript of tweets and a profile of participants. Responses to the questions are presented in this paper.

Results

There were 288 tweets from 42 users, generating 2.1 million impressions during the 1-hour chat. Participants included 23 patient advocates (most of whom were patients themselves), 7 doctors, 6 researchers or academics, 3 health care providers (2 nurses, 1 clinical psychologist), and 2 advocacy organizations. Participants noted communication gaps between patient and provider especially as related to the need for individualized medication dosing to minimize side effects and maximize quality of life. Timeliness of insurance company response, for example, to authorize treatments, was also a concern. Chat participants noted that palliative care is not well integrated into metastatic breast cancer care and that insurance company denials of coverage for these services were common. Regarding financial challenges, chat participants mentioned unexpected copays, changes in insurance drug formularies that made it difficult to anticipate drug costs, and limits on the number of physical therapy visits covered by insurance. Last, on the topic of disability benefits, participants expressed frustration about how to access disability benefits. When prompted for input regarding what health system and policy changes are necessary, participants suggested a number of ideas, including expanding the availability of nurse navigation for metastatic breast cancer, developing and offering a guide for the range of treatment and support resources patients with metastatic breast cancer, and improving access to clinical trials.

Conclusions

Rapid assessments drawing from online community insights may be a critical source of data that can be used to ensure more responsive policy action to improve patient care.