Publications

BACKGROUND: Risks related to long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain are high and may increase over time with aging. Deprescribing may be a beneficial intervention for older adults prescribed chronic opioids.

METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with hypothetical clinical cases of older adults prescribed opioids for chronic pain: (1) low-risk case: a patient prescribed low-dose opioids without concerns; (2) moderate-risk case: a patient with multimorbidity and concurrent benzodiazepine use prescribed moderate opioid doses; (3) high-risk case: a patient prescribed high-dose opioids with signs of an opioid use disorder (OUD). PCPs were asked, in an open-ended fashion, to discuss whether they would initiate a deprescribing conversation, how they would approach deprescribing, and how they would approach a patient who declined recommendations to deprescribe.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: PCPs from a Massachusetts health system.

RESULTS: 18 PCPs participated (56% female, 78% academic). More than half of PCPs would initiate a deprescribing conversation across the three cases. PCPs' approach to deprescribing and mitigating risks differed based on clinical risk. In low and moderate-risk cases, PCPs emphasized a patient-directed taper plan and education on opioid risks. In the high-risk case, some PCPs were uncertain about initiating a deprescribing conversation due to concerns about the patient's mental health and the risk of illicit opioid use. Naloxone was infrequently recommended across the three cases, but in the high-risk case, approximately half of PCPs suggested medications for OUD.

CONCLUSIONS: PCPs reported that they would often initiate opioid deprescribing conversations with older adults, but were less confident in managing older adults with signs of OUD. PCPs require additional support to implement successful conversations on opioid deprescribing with older adults.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized older adults are commonly discharged with changes to antihypertensive and glucose-lowering (cardiometabolic) medications. Though adverse drug events remain a leading cause of readmissions, there is little contemporary data on how medication discharge planning is communicated and how often medication errors occur post-discharge.

OBJECTIVE: To assess older adults' post-hospital medication use and ambulatory follow-up after receiving cardiometabolic medication changes during hospitalization.

DESIGN: Prospective cohort study from 11/2022 to 01/2024.

PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 years or older from discharged home from an academic medical center with changes to pre-admission cardiometabolic medications.

MAIN MEASURES: Participants completed 7- and 90-day telephonic surveys on health status, medication use, and discharge planning. Self-report of medication use was compared to discharge summaries to identify medication errors (not initiating, not stopping, or taking incorrect dose). Multivariable regression models were used to identify characteristics associated with errors.

KEY RESULTS: The cohort included 151 participants (median [IQR] age 74 [70-78] years; 54% male; 17% Black, 82% White, 41% frail). Participants were admitted with a median (IQR) of 3 (2-4) cardiometabolic medications and discharged with a median (IQR) of 2 (1-4) medication changes. Of the 319 individual medications changed at discharge, 33% were further modified by 90 days. Participants reported comprehensive medication discharge planning for only 13% of medication changes. Though 93% of participants reported they understood the purpose of each of their medications at discharge, 39% had ≥ 1 medication errors at 7 days and 50% at 90 days. Use of ≥ 5 cardiometabolic medications was associated with higher rates of medication errors at 7 days (IRR 1.63; 95% CI 1.07-2.48) and 90 days (IRR 1.66; 95% CI 1.13-2.45).

CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitalized older adults discharged with cardiometabolic medication changes experienced medication errors or gaps in discharge planning. Steps to ensure all patients receive high-quality medication discharge planning are needed.

BACKGROUND: ED disposition decisions for older adults are complex and often uncertain, yet studies rarely capture emergency physicians' real-time perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient outcomes based on emergency physician-perceived need for admission.

DESIGN: Single-site prospective cohort study conducted between July and November 2024.

SETTING: A Boston-area academic tertiary care ED.

PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 65 and older dispositioned by attending physicians, excluding patients who were handed off, left without being seen, or eloped.

MEASUREMENTS: Physicians rated admission need using a 5-point Likert scale (2-4 considered marginal). Primary outcome was ED disposition stratified by rating. Secondary outcomes were hospital length-of-stay (LOS), 7-day ED return, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS: Of the 489 patients (mean age 76.9 years [SD 7.5], 51.1% female), 55.8% were non-marginal admissions, 26.0% were non-marginal discharges, and 18.2% were marginal dispositions. Patients with marginal dispositions had longer workup times than non-marginal admissions or discharges (3.3 vs. 2.8 vs. 2.4 h, p < 0.05). Thirty-day mortality was greater for non-marginal admissions (8.8%) than non-marginal discharges (1.6%, p = 0.01), but not significantly different than marginal dispositions (3.4%). Marginal admissions had shorter median LOS (3.1 vs. 5 days, p < 0.01) and higher early discharge rates (27.8% vs. 13.2%, p = 0.01) than non-marginal admissions. Marginal discharges had fewer 7-day returns than non-marginal discharges (0% vs. 11.7%, p = 0.04). For marginal cases, physicians discussed admission benefits more than risks (70.1% vs. 43.3%, p < 0.01) for marginal cases.

LIMITATIONS: Single-site and need for admission were reported contemporaneous with disposition decision.

CONCLUSIONS: One in six older adult ED dispositions was identified as marginal. These patients are potential targets for shared decision-making and alternative care pathways.

BackgroundMessaging strategies hold promise to reduce breast cancer overscreening. However, it is not known whether they may have differential effects among medical maximizers who prefer to take action about their health versus medical minimizers who prefer to wait and see.MethodsIn a randomized controlled survey experiment that included 2 sequential surveys with 3,041 women aged 65+ y from a US population-based online panel, we randomized participants to 1) no messages, 2) single exposure to a screening cessation message, or 3) 2 exposures over time to the screening cessation message. We assessed support for stopping screening in a hypothetical patient and intention to stop screening oneself on 7-point scales, where higher values indicated stronger support and intentions to stop screening. We conducted stratified analyses by medical-maximizing preference and moderation analysis.ResultsOf the women, 40.7% (n = 1,238) were medical maximizers; they had lower support and intention for screening cessation in all groups compared with the medical minimizers. Two message exposures increased support for screening cessation among medical maximizers, with a mean score of 3.68 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.51-3.85) compared with no message (mean score 2.20, 95% CI 2.00-2.39, P < 0.001). A similar pattern was seen for screening intention. Linear regression models showed no differential messaging effect by medical-maximizing preference.ConclusionsMedical maximizers, although less likely to support screening cessation, were nonetheless responsive to messaging strategies designed to reduce breast cancer overscreening.HighlightsIt is not known if a message on rationales for stopping breast cancer screening would have differential effects among medical maximizers who prefer to take action when it comes to their health versus medical minimizers who prefer to wait and see.In a 2-wave randomized controlled survey experiment with 3,041 older women, we found that medical maximizers, although less likely to support screening cessation compared with medical minimizers, were nonetheless responsive to the messaging intervention, and the magnitude of the intervention effect was similar between maximizers and minimizers.Medical maximizers reported higher levels of worry and annoyance after reading the message compared with the minimizers, but the absolute levels of worry and annoyance were low.Our findings suggest that messaging can be a useful tool for reducing overscreening even in a highly reluctant population.

Sankey diagram of agreement between dischareg summary, discharge instructions, and patient provided reasoning for chronic medication changes made during hospitalization.

INTRODUCTION: Women ≥70 years with low-risk breast cancer face nuanced therapy decisions. Using qualitative analysis, we aimed to determine how oncologists and patients integrate geriatric considerations into complex treatment conversations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We recruited women aged ≥70, newly diagnosed with clinical T1-2N0 hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative disease between October 2020 and March 2023 from a large cancer center and audio-recorded and transcribed their consults with surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists. We identified geriatric issues included in conversational content and the dynamics of patient/oncologist communication. Data collection and analysis were simultaneously performed. We also assessed participant decision-making preferences, frailty, and life expectancy.

RESULTS: Of 48 eligible patients approached, 27 (56 %) participated with eight surgical oncologists, 17 with 11 medical oncologists, and four with three radiation oncologists (n = 48 consultations recorded). Fourteen patients (48 %) were ≥ 75 years, 23 were non-Hispanic White (76 %). Patients preferred to share (n = 15, 58 %) or make their own treatment decisions (n = 10, 39 %), rather than defer to the oncologist. Oncologists presented an explicit treatment choice in 16 conversations (35 %). Chronological age was discussed in 27 (56 %) conversations, comorbidities in 44 (92 %), and multimorbidity in two (4 %). Other geriatric considerations were discussed in the minority of conversations [physiologic age: 20 (42 %); function: 20 (42 %); quality-of-life: 5 (10 %); life expectancy: 5 (10 %); polypharmacy: 2 (4 %)].

DISCUSSION: Despite numerous treatment options, oncologists neither commonly offer older women with low-risk breast cancer explicit treatment choices, nor discuss geriatric issues besides comorbidity. Training oncologists in communication around geriatric issues may lead to more person-centered breast cancer care.

UNLABELLED: Background. The use of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision aids (DAs) increases patient knowledge and engagement in decision making. Thus, we aimed to implement a CRC DA in a Boston-area health system informed by the Theory of Change quality improvement framework. Methods. Following international standards, an interdisciplinary working group developed a 2-page CRC screening DA, readable on smartphones, for adults ages 45 to 75 y. Prior to DA implementation, we texted a study survey to 8,641 adults age 45 to 75 y seen in primary care at our health system (baseline). Between January 2022 and April 2023, we texted the DA to 21,522 patients due for CRC screening and scheduled with their primary care provider (PCP). In August 2022 and in May 2023 (follow-up), we texted a study survey to patients who had been texted the DA in prior months. We used linear regression to examine the DA's effects on shared decision-making (SDM) quality (using the 4-item SDM Process Scale, for which scores range from 0-4), knowledge (2 questions), and reported discussions with PCPs of screening modalities. Results. Of 30,163 texted study surveys, 1,692 (5.6%, 697 baseline and 995 follow-up) were completed; 77.1% of participants were non-Hispanic White and 45.3% were aged 60 to 75 y. Overall, 30.6% (n = 304) of follow-up survey respondents reported reviewing the DA. Compared with baseline participants, these patients reported higher SDM quality (SDM process scores = 2.5 v. 2.1, P < 0.001) and more knowledge about CRC screening and were more likely to have discussed stool-based testing with PCPs. Limitations. Low response rate with no sociodemographic data for nonresponders. Conclusions/Implications. Patients who read a CRC screening DA texted to them before primary care visits may experience improved SDM quality. However, a more intensive implementation strategy may be needed for more patients to read DAs.

HIGHLIGHTS: It is feasible for large health systems to automatize text messaging of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decision aids (DAs) to patients due for CRC screening before a visit with their primary care practitioner.Patients who review a texted CRC screening DA report higher shared decision-making quality and knowledge about CRC screening.Use of CRC DAs may decrease screening via colonoscopy but not overall screening rates.A more intensive intervention than text messaging is likely needed to increase the number of patients who review a CRC screening DA.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) visits offer opportunities for seriously ill patients to formulate future medical care goals, yet ED clinicians lack practical strategies for these conversations. ED GOAL, a behavioral intervention, engages seriously ill yet clinically stable older adults in the ED to address advance care planning (ACP) with their outpatient clinicians. In a randomized trial, goals-of-care documentation was significantly higher in the intervention group compared to controls after three (24.3% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.03) and 6 months (31.4% vs. 12.7%, p < 0.01). This study is a sub-analysis to learn about intervention arm participants' perceived benefits and obstacles of the intervention.

METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews between October 2022 and August 2024 (N = 52) with intervention-arm patients aged 50+ years at three hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts. Using rapid qualitative analyses, we identified themes in intervention-arm participants' comments to open-ended questions about the intervention's benefits and obstacles to continue ACP outside the ED.

RESULTS: Of 70 intervention-arm participants, 52 completed interviews, of which two were surrogates. ED GOAL motivated most patients to initiate ACP with outpatient clinicians and loved ones and improved the quality of conversations by clarifying patients' wishes and improving patient-clinician relations. Barriers to continuing ACP were the lack of clinician availability and patient/surrogate readiness. Those with clear care goals found the intervention less useful yet harmless.

CONCLUSIONS: The intervention provided participants with insights into actionable ACP steps. To address the lack of clinician availability, these conversations may be completed by non-physician clinicians or through non-personnel resources. Better tailored ACP interventions may improve patients' readiness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05209880.

OBJECTIVES: Guidelines recommend women consider their breast cancer risk and life expectancy when deciding on breast cancer screening (e.g., intervals, when to stop) and prevention medication. We previously developed a competing-risk model to predict 10-year breast cancer risk and non-breast cancer death in women > 55 years to support decision-making. Here, we aimed to develop a decision aid (DA) website incorporating our model's risk estimates.

METHODS: We designed the DA based on international standards using the free R package Shiny. We included a risk-assessment page, risk estimates, and decision support on breast cancer screening and prevention medications. We recruited national experts, Boston-area primary care practitioners (PCPs), and female patients > 55 years without breast cancer history to provide feedback on the DA via questionnaire or personal interview. We used thematic analysis to identify themes in participants' open-ended comments until reaching thematic saturation. Study questionnaires assessed DA helpfulness and ease-of-use.

RESULTS: Forty-five (53.6 %) of 84 eligible patients approached participated. Their mean age was 65.9 years (SD 7.9), 31 (68.9 %) were non-Hispanic White, and 31 (68.9 %) graduated college. Of 52 experts/PCPs contacted, 30 participated. Participants found the DA helpful (35/44 patients [79.5 %] and 28/29 [96.6 %] experts/PCPs) and easy-to-use (39/45 patients [86.7 %] and 28/29 PCPs/experts, [96.6 %]). They described the DA as "informative" and liked the "tailored-risk information." They suggested changes to simplify the DA and to better individualize the decision-support. We iteratively revised the website. We could not program some recommended changes using the free R application.

CONCLUSIONS: We developed an informative and easy-to-use breast cancer screening and prevention medication DA website (https://bcrisk55plus.shinyapps.io/risktool/) for women > 55 using free software. Next, we will program the website using HTML code and test its effects prospectively.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We anticipate that use of the DA will help women > 55 with breast cancer screening and prevention decisions.