UNASSIGNED: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an important treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. It is important to identify predictors of excellent outcomes (good clinical outcomes, more time spent at home) after TAVR that are potentially amenable to improvement.
UNASSIGNED: The purpose of the study was to use machine learning to identify potentially modifiable predictors of clinically relevant patient-centered outcomes after TAVR.
UNASSIGNED: We used data from 8,332 TAVR cases (January 2016-December 2021) from 21 hospitals to train random forest models with 57 patient characteristics (demographics, comorbidities, surgical risk score, lab values, health status scores) and care process parameters to predict the end point, a composite of parameters that designated an excellent outcome and included no major complications (in-hospital or at 30 days), post-TAVR length of stay of 1 day or less, discharge to home, no readmission, and alive at 30 days. We used recursive feature elimination with cross-validation and Shapley Additive Explanation feature importance to identify parameters with the highest predictive values.
UNASSIGNED: The final random forest model retained 29 predictors (15 patient characteristics and 14 care process components); the area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.77, 0.67, and 0.73, respectively. Four potentially modifiable predictors with relatively high Shapley Additive Explanation values were identified: type of anesthesia, direct movement to stepdown unit post-TAVR, time between catheterization and TAVR, and preprocedural length of stay.
UNASSIGNED: This study identified four potentially modifiable predictors of excellent outcome after TAVR, suggesting that machine learning combined with hospital-level data can inform modifiable components of care, which could support better delivery of care for patients undergoing TAVR.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic excellence refers to the optimal process to attain an accurate and precise explanation about a patient\'s condition and incorporates the perspectives of patients and their care partners. Patient-reported measures (PRMs), designed to capture patient-reported information, have potential to contribute to achieving diagnostic excellence. We aimed to craft a set of roadmaps illustrating goals and guiding the development of PRMs for diagnostic excellence (\"Roadmaps\").
METHODS: We used iterative inputs from environmental literature scans, expert consultations, and patient voice and employed human-centred design (HCD) and equity-focused road-mapping. The culminating activity of these approaches was an Expert Convening.
RESULTS: Use of PRMs can achieve multiple goals for diagnostic excellence, including but not limited to: (1) PRMs for diagnostic continuity, (2) diagnostic PRM alerts, (3) PRM-based quality improvement, (4) PRMs for research, (5) PRMs for routine screening, (6) PRM-based diagnostic excellence population-level patterns, and (7) PRMs supporting patient storytelling. Equity is considered as a cross-cutting goal. Altogether these and future goals support operationalising a vision of patient-reported diagnostic excellence. Roadmaps were developed as a dynamic tool to illustrate PRMs in relation to specific steps with feedback loops to accomplish goals, anticipated timeframes (8-15 years), synergies to foster, and challenges to overcome. Roadmaps are practical in their following PRMs through the stages of development, endorsement, implementation and scaling, and acting upon those measures. Timeframe estimates assume immediate transitions between these stages and no acceleration through incentives and active coordination.
CONCLUSIONS: PRMs for diagnostic excellence have potential to connect patient perspectives, equity, and achievable goals. Roadmaps offer a design approach to enable coordinating measurement activities among diverse stakeholders. Roadmaps also highlight versatility in ways patient-reported information can be collected and used, from clinical settings to public health contexts. Patient-reported diagnostic excellence cannot be established as a solely top-down endeavour, but inherently benefits from bottom-up approaches.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) globally represents a significant health challenge, particularly among patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. A careful nutritional and pharmacological prescription plays a key role in the effective management of these patients to optimize serum electrolytes, such as potassium, phosphorus, and protein intake. Furthermore, these patients can suffer psychological distress due to dietary restrictions and tight medication schedules. The present study explores the effectiveness of the person-centered IARA model in improving physiological markers and quality of life in CKD patients undergoing hemodialysis treatment. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the IARA model, 60 patients (M = 40; F = 20; 60.5 ± 9.9 years) undergoing thrice-weekly hemodialysis sessions were enrolled and randomly and blindly assigned to the Control or IARA group. The reduction in abnormal blood potassium, phosphorus, and total protein levels was investigated, alongside the psychological state through the SF-12 questionnaire. Preliminary findings showed a discernible reduction in the frequency of abnormal blood K (> 5.0 mmol/L) and P (> 4.5 mmol/L) levels in the IARA group compared to the Control group. In particular, such reductions were approximately 40% for K (OR = 0.57; 95% CL = 0.23/1.46) and about 15% for P (OR = 0.86; 95% CL = 0.27/2.74). A similar tendency was also observed for patient fluid intake during each hemodialysis session, with the frequency of higher-risk patients in the IARA group being 50% lower (OR = 0.50; 95% CL = 0.07/3.79) than that of the Control group. Although preliminary findings from this study suggest that the IARA model may have a positive effect on CKD patients\' subjective wellbeing and quality of life (QoL), further research is needed to understand the long-term impact of the IARA intervention.

Patient compliance following periodontal therapy is extremely important in predicting the prognosis of the disease and maintaining treatment outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the perception of periodontitis patients about treatment outcomes. A cross-sectional study was conducted among periodontitis patients in a single dental center through a pre-validated questionnaire that was distributed to each participant in the waiting area of periodontal clinics by utilizing a convenience sampling technique. Median and interquartile ranges were used in addition to frequency and percentages. Bivariate analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis test. Among the 300 male and female participants, the median score (interquartile range) of the current level of pain revealed that males experienced more pain than females, with a median score of 5 (0-7) for males and 4 (0-6) for women. However, the median (interquartile range) for desired and expected pain levels in both genders was 0 (0-1), 0 (0-4). There were significant differences in median score ratings between males and females for expected, distress, success, and importance levels (p-value < 0.05). Patients with periodontitis provided valuable insights into the experiences of individuals undergoing treatment for periodontal disease, indicating overall patient satisfaction with the expected levels of periodontal outcomes.

Background: Breastfeeding is critically important for optimal health of both birthing people and their infants. Shared, patient-centered goals of how health care team members, community groups, and families can help facilitate breastfeeding success are needed, as are ways to define and measure what breastfeeding success looks like from the patient\'s perspective. Methods: The Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine and Reaching Our Sisters Everywhere\'s collaborated in a multi-methods approach to identify breastfeeding priorities most important to parents. Results: We identified (1) Key components of a successful breastfeeding journey defined by parents and families, (2) Research priorities that will enable families to achieve breastfeeding. Conclusion: Dissemination of these findings can foster research efforts that are codesigned with birthing parents and families and reflect their priorities.

BACKGROUND: Providing healthcare for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) is challenging. Polypharmacy and complex treatment plans can lead to high treatment burden and risk for adverse events. For clinicians, managing the complexities of patients with MCC leaves little room to identify what matters and align care options with patients\' health priorities. New care approaches are needed to navigate these challenges. In this clinical trial, we evaluate implementation and effectiveness outcomes of an innovative, structured, patient-centered care approach (Patient Priorities Care; PPC) for reducing treatment burden and aligning health care decisions with the health priorities of older adults with MCC.
METHODS: This is a multisite, assessor-blind, two-arm, parallel hybrid type 1 randomized controlled trial. We are enrolling 396 older (65+) Veterans with MCC who receive primary care at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Veterans are randomly assigned to either PPC or usual care. In the PPC arm, Veterans have a brief telephone call with a study facilitator to identify their personal health priorities. Then, primary care providers use this information to align healthcare with Veteran priorities during their established clinic appointments. Data are collected at baseline and 4-month follow up to assess for changes in treatment burden and use of home and community services. Formative and summative evaluations are also collected to assess for implementation outcomes according to Proctor\'s implementation framework.
CONCLUSIONS: This work has the potential to significantly improve the standard of care by personalizing healthcare and helping patients achieve what is most important to them.

BACKGROUND: The aging population is a challenge for the healthcare system that must identify strategies that meet their needs. Practicing patient-centered care has been shown beneficial for this patient-group. The effect of patient-centered care is called patient-centered outcomes and can be appraised using outcomes measurements.
OBJECTIVE: The main aim was to review and map existing knowledge related to patient-centered outcomes and patient-centered outcomes measurements for older people, as well as identify key-concepts and knowledge-gaps. The research questions were: How can patient-centered outcomes for older people be measured, and which patient-centered outcomes matters the most for the older people?
METHODS: Scoping review.
METHODS: Search for relevant publications in electronical databases, grey literature databases and websites from year 2000 to 2021. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, followed by full text review and extraction of data using a data extraction framework.
RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included, of which six with involvement of patients and/or experts in the process on determine the outcomes. Outcomes that matter the most to older people was interpreted as: access to- and experience of care, autonomy and control, cognition, daily living, emotional health, falls, general health, medications, overall survival, pain, participation in decision making, physical function, physical health, place of death, social role function, symptom burden, and time spent in hospital. The most frequently mentioned/used outcomes measurements tools were the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT), EQ-5D, Gait Speed, Katz- ADL index, Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ9), SF/RAND-36 and 4-Item Screening Zarit Burden Interview.
CONCLUSIONS: Few studies have investigated the older people\'s opinion of what matters the most to them, which forms a knowledge-gap in the field. Future research should focus on providing older people a stronger voice in what they think matters the most to them.

OBJECTIVE: As part of a larger mixed-methods study to better define equity in access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care in Georgia, this analysis sought to understand: (1) how individuals define quality care for their SRH services; and (2) how quality of care is salient in their SRH care-seeking.
METHODS: From January 2019 to February 2020, we conducted life history interviews with individuals with the capacity to become pregnant in suburban areas in Georgia. We analyzed interviews using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: SRH care quality was shaped by experiences with health center environment, with providers, and with staff. Study participants emphasized elements associated with trusted SRH care such as showing compassion, respecting and non-judging, taking time, providing information, and assuring agency. Participants also voiced a desire for holistic care that addressed the lived experiences of the individual. Participants took quality of care into account when care-seeking but sometimes had to weigh out preferences for quality with issues of affordability.
CONCLUSIONS: Access to quality person-centered care is an essential component of realized access to SRH services. Measures of equitable access and quality should account for experiences of quality care that include both provider and staff interactions as well as the larger healthcare environment and ability to use quality care despite financial constraints.
CONCLUSIONS: Quality family planning care should involve both clinicians and staff to incorporate showing compassion, providing respectful and non-judgmental care, taking time with patients, providing information, assuring agency in decision-making, as well as addressing the lived experiences of individuals.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced mortality across the United States has continued to rise. To date, there are limited measures to evaluate patient preferences and priorities regarding substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and many patients do not have access to evidence-based treatment options. Patients and their families seeking SUD treatment may begin their search for an SUD treatment facility online, where they can find information about individual facilities, as well as a summary of patient-generated web-based reviews via popular platforms such as Google or Yelp. Web-based reviews of health care facilities may reflect information about factors associated with positive or negative patient satisfaction. The association between patient satisfaction with SUD treatment and drug-induced mortality is not well understood.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the association between online review content of SUD treatment facilities and drug-induced state mortality.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of online reviews and ratings of Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)-designated SUD treatment facilities listed between September 2005 and October 2021 was conducted. The primary outcomes were (1) mean online rating of SUD treatment facilities from 1 star (worst) to 5 stars (best) and (2) average drug-induced mortality rates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) WONDER Database (2006-2019). Clusters of words with differential frequencies within reviews were identified. A 3-level linear model was used to estimate the association between online review ratings and drug-induced mortality.
RESULTS: A total of 589 SAMHSA-designated facilities (n=9597 reviews) were included in this study. Drug-induced mortality was compared with the average. Approximately half (24/47, 51%) of states had below average (\"low\") mortality rates (mean 13.40, SD 2.45 deaths per 100,000 people), and half (23/47, 49%) had above average (\"high\") drug-induced mortality rates (mean 21.92, SD 3.69 deaths per 100,000 people). The top 5 themes associated with low drug-induced mortality included detoxification and addiction rehabilitation services (r=0.26), gratitude for recovery (r=-0.25), thankful for treatment (r=-0.32), caring staff and amazing experience (r=-0.23), and individualized recovery programs (r=-0.20). The top 5 themes associated with high mortality were care from doctors or providers (r=0.24), rude and insensitive care (r=0.23), medication and prescriptions (r=0.22), front desk and reception experience (r=0.22), and dissatisfaction with communication (r=0.21). In the multilevel linear model, a state with a 10 deaths per 100,000 people increase in mortality was associated with a 0.30 lower average Yelp rating (P=.005).
CONCLUSIONS: Lower online ratings of SUD treatment facilities were associated with higher drug-induced mortality at the state level. Elements of patient experience may be associated with state-level mortality. Identified themes from online, organically derived patient content can inform efforts to improve high-quality and patient-centered SUD care.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials that are patient-centered appear to be more successful (e.g., clinical outcomes, improved communication, mutual empowerment, changed attitudes), thus, action research may be a field of importance. The current study explores the Formation and Execution of Activities phases of a community-academic partnership (CAP).
METHODS: Members consisted of industry stakeholders, a healthcare/academic institution, and patients/families with lived experiences as cancer survivors and/or caregivers. Retrospectively, CAP members described the facilitating and/or hindering factors present in the partnership development. A document review process was used. Field notes from three CAP meetings, which focused on understanding clinical trial participation, were analyzed using a thematic approach.
RESULTS: Seven facilitating and three hindering factors were present. Interpersonal (vs. operational) processes were referenced as influential facilitating factors more often. Themes that emerged included \'trials as a treatment option\', \'leaving a legacy\', and \'timing is critical.\'
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a patient-centered perspective on barriers/challenges of clinical trial participation and how to improve future perceptions.
Clinical trials are more successful when patients are engaged, and their perspectives have been considered in the study design. Community-academic partnerships (CAPs) are one way to ensure patients are more engaged in the research process by creating a collaboration where all parties involved play an equitable role. We provide an example of a CAP with an industry stakeholder, a healthcare/academic institution, and patients as well as families with lived experiences as cancer survivors and/or caregivers. Described here two phases of the CAP: the Formation and the Execution of Activities phases. The Formation phase covers the collaboration process and development of the CAP. In our study, to better understand this phase, CAP members described what did and did not go well during the partnership development. We found more aspects went well than did not and that processes related to the quality of the relationship and communication among CAP members were important. The Execution of Activities phase focuses on how the CAP is working towards an agreed upon outcome. In our study, to better understand this phase, we reviewed notes taken at previous CAP meetings that focused on exploring participation in clinical trials as a treatment option. We found that when it comes to participation in clinical trials, patients and/or caregivers with lived experiences with cancer, felt that timing of this treatment option was important and that reasons for participation included wanting to leave a legacy. In this paper we describe some challenges of clinical trial participation, identified by patients and caregivers, and discuss how to improve views of clinical trial participation in the future.