scholarly journals Improving screening and management of latent tuberculosis infection: development and evaluation of latent tuberculosis infection primary care model

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Kunin ◽  
Mark Timlin ◽  
Chris Lemoh ◽  
David A. Sheffield ◽  
Alana Russo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Patient Education ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Primary Care Clinic ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis ◽  
Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Barriers And Enablers

Abstract Background In Australia, demand for specialist infectious diseases services exceeds capacity to provide timely management of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in areas of high refugee and asylum seeker settlement. A model for treating LTBI patients in primary care has been developed and piloted in a refugee-focused primary health service (Monash Health Refugee Health and Wellbeing [MHRHW]) and a universal primary care clinic. This study reports on the development and evaluation of the model, focusing on the model feasibility, and barriers and enablers to its success. Methods A convergent mix-methods design was used to evaluate the model for treating LTBI patients in primary care, where a prospective cohort study of patients commencing treatment either at MHRHW or the universal primary care clinic determined the model feasibility, while focus groups with clinicians directly involved in treating these patients explored barriers and enablers to sustainability and success of the model. Results From January 2017 to April 2018, 65 patients with confirmed LTBI presented at participating clinics. Treatment was accepted by 31 (48%) patients, of whom 15(48%) were treated at MHRHW and 16 (52%) at the universal primary care clinic. The 6-months’ treatment completion rate was higher at MHRHW compared to the universal primary care clinic (14 (93%) compared to 9 (56%) respectively, p = 0.0373). Reasons for non-completion included adverse reaction, opting out and relocation. At the completion of the pilot, 15 clinicians participated in two focus groups. Clinicians identified barriers and enablers for successful LTBI management at patient, provider, organisational and clinical levels. While barriers for treatment completion and adherence were consistent across the two pilot sites, enablers, such as resources to facilitate patient education and follow-up, were available only at MHRHW. Conclusion Screening and management of LTBI patients can be achieved within the primary care setting, considerate of barriers and enablers at patient, provider, organisational and clinical levels. Upscaling of a primary care response to the management of LTBI will require supporting primary care clinics with resources to employ dedicated clinical staff for patient education, follow-up communication and monitoring medication adherence.

scholarly journals POS1157 CONCORDANCE BETWEEN THE QUANTIFERON-TB GOLD IN-TUBE AND TUBERCULIN TEST FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF LATENT TUBERCULOSIS INFECTION IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC DISEASES

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 857.1-857
Author(s):  
C. Pávez Perales ◽  
A. Quiles Roger ◽  
E. Grau García ◽  
M. De la Rubia Navarro ◽  
S. Leal Rodriguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatic Diseases ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis ◽  
Tuberculin Test ◽  
Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Ltbi Screening ◽  
Kappa Test ◽  
Receive Treatment

Background:Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) are at higher risk of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) reactivation. To detect and treat it before starting treatment, especially with biological therapies, decrease the reactivation risk. Diagnosis is carried out by the tuberculin skin test (TST) or interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs), IGRAs might be more specific and sensitive.Objectives:We aim to analyze the concordance between QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QTF) and TST for the diagnosis of LTBI in patients with rheumatic diseases.Methods:A retrospective observational study was conducted including patients diagnosed with RD screened for LTBI with both TST and QTF (2014-2018). Demographical and clinical variables at screening and at follow-up were collected. The concordance between both tests has been estimated as categorical variables using Cohen´s Kappa test, considering “poor” if it is ≤ 0,20; “low” if 0,20 < k ≤ 0,40, “moderate” if 0,40 < k ≤ 0,60, “substantial” if 0,60 < k ≤ 0,80 and “optimal” if k > 0,80.Results:167 patients were included (57% women) with a mean age of 52±16 years. 42% of them had systemic autoimmune diseases, 22% spondyloarthropathies and 36% other RD. 2 had history of past active tuberculosis (TB). At the time of screening, 46.11% were treated with GC.LTBI was diagnosed in 35 patients: 15 had both QTF and TST positive, 16 only QTF positive and 4 only TST positive. 12 from 31 QTF positive patients were treated with GC at the time of screening. 3 from 19 TST positive patients were treated with GC at the time of screening.After LTBI screening 62 patients received biological treatment, 4 of them had both test positive, 6 only QTF positive and 2 only TST positive. 11 received LTBI treatment according to the hospital protocol (isoniazid for 6 to 9 months). 10 completed treatment, 1 did not because of intolerance and did not receive other treatment. 1 patient with only TST positive was considered a false positive and did not receive treatment. During follow-up no TB reactivation was reported.23 patients with LBTI received treatment other than biological therapy during follow-up, of them 8 received LBTI treatment. There was no TB reactivation during follow up.The Kappa concordance between QTF and TST was estimated: moderated in the whole sample, poor in the patients treated with GC at screening, and substantial when the patients treated with GC at screening were excluded. Results are shown in Table 1.Table 1.Kappa concordance between QTF and TST.Conclusion:QTF seems to be the most appropriate LTBI screening test in patients with RD treated with GC. Screening and treatment of LTBI in patients with RD treated with or without biological agents was effective in reducing TB reactivation.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.

Influence of Environmental Design on Team Interactions Across Three Family Medicine Clinics: Perceptions of Communication, Efficiency, and Privacy

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 159-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zaher Karp ◽  
Sandra Kamnetz ◽  
Natalie Wietfeldt ◽  
Christine Sinsky ◽  
Todd Molfenter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Primary Care Clinic ◽  
Environmental Design ◽  
Communication Styles ◽  
Interaction Patterns ◽  
Patient Contact ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Communication Efficiency

Objective: In this study, we explored how two different primary care clinic physical layouts (onstage/offstage and pod-based [PB] designs) influenced pre- and postvisit team experiences and perceptions. Background: Protocols encourage healthcare team communication before and after primary care visits to support better patient care. Physical clinic environments may influence these behaviors, but limited research has been performed. Method: We conducted observations, three interviews with clinic managers, and six focus groups with 21 providers and staff at three family medicine teaching clinics. Observational data were captured through field notes and spaghetti diagrams. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a grounded theory-based approach to understand how aspects of the clinic environment affected communication, efficiency, and privacy. Results: Variations in communication styles and trade-offs between patient contact and privacy emerged as differences. In the onstage/offstage design, colocated teams had increased verbal communication but perceived being isolated from other clinic teams. In contrast, teams in PB clinics communicated with other clinic teams but had more informal patient contact within care-team stations that imposed privacy risk. Conclusions: Primary care clinic design appears to alter provider–team and patient–provider communication and flow. Organizations should consider aligning environmental design with desired interaction patterns when building new primary care clinics.

scholarly journals Randomized Controlled Trial of Interventions to Improve Follow-up for Latent Tuberculosis Infection After Release From Jail

2002 ◽  
Vol 162 (9) ◽  
pp. 1044 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Castle White ◽  
Jacqueline P. Tulsky ◽  
Joe Goldenson ◽  
Carmen J. Portillo ◽  
Masae Kawamura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis ◽  
Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Modeling the Impact of Recommendations for Primary Care–Based Screening for Latent Tuberculosis Infection in California

2020 ◽  
Vol 135 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 172S-181S
Author(s):  
Andrea Parriott ◽  
James G. Kahn ◽  
Haleh Ashki ◽  
Adam Readhead ◽  
Pennan M. Barry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis ◽  
Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
California Department ◽  
The Us ◽  
Almost All ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Ltbi Testing

Objective Targeted testing and treatment of persons with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is a critical component of the US tuberculosis (TB) elimination strategy. In January 2016, the California Department of Public Health issued a tool and user guide for TB risk assessment (California tool) and guidance for LTBI testing, and in September 2016, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued recommendations for LTBI testing in primary care settings. We estimated the epidemiologic effect of adherence to both recommendations in California. Methods We used an individual-based Markov micro-simulation model to estimate the number of cases of TB disease expected through 2026 with baseline LTBI strategies compared with implementation of the USPSTF or California tool guidance. We estimated the risk of LTBI by age and country of origin, the probability of being in a targeted population, and the probability of presenting for primary care based on available data. We assumed 100% adherence to testing guidance but imperfect adherence to treatment. Results Implementation of USPSTF and California tool guidance would result in nearly identical numbers of tests administered and cases of TB disease prevented. Perfect adherence to either recommendation would result in approximately 7000 cases of TB disease averted (40% reduction compared with baseline) by 2026. Almost all of this decline would be driven by a reduction in the number of cases among non–US-born persons. Conclusions By focusing on the non–US-born population, adherence to LTBI testing strategies recommended by the USPSTF and the California tool could substantially reduce the burden of TB disease in California in the next decade.

scholarly journals 1376. Physician Practice Patterns for Screening and Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in the South Asian Population in Central New Jersey

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S499-S500
Author(s):  
Nupur Gulati ◽  
Sri Ram Pentakota ◽  
Kristina N Feja ◽  
Bishakha Ghoshal ◽  
Rajita Bhavaraju ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
South Asian ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Latent Tuberculosis ◽  
Tuberculosis Infection ◽  
Medical Graduate ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Ltbi Screening

Abstract Background New Jersey (NJ) has a significant burden of tuberculosis (TB) cases (ranked 8th in the United States) and 22% of the cases are among foreign-born (FB) individuals. We have approximately 33% FB residents in our targeted counties in Central NJ of whom 43% are originally from high TB burden areas of South Asia. Central NJ is home to the county with the second highest TB case rate in NJ. Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) treatment remains a key component of the World Health Organization TB elimination strategy. We sought to survey community physicians about their LTBI screening and treatment practices in South Asian (SA) patients. Methods An IRB-approved anonymous survey was distributed online to practicing staff physicians at local hospitals over a 2-month period. The primary outcome measure was whether physicians appropriately screen for LTBI. A secondary outcome measure was whether follow-up after medication initiation was provided. Predictors measured included: age, gender, self -identification of physician as SA, years in practice, and if they were a foreign medical graduate (FMG). Descriptive statistics were provided using counts and proportions. Chi-square tests were used for bivariate analyses to look for factors associated with LTBI screening and treatment. Results A total of 218 physicians responded to the survey; of whom, 137 identified themselves as primary care physicians (i.e., pediatrics (62%), internal medicine (30%), or family medicine (8%)). About half of them were FMG and 40% identify themselves as SA. Three out of four of these physicians (n = 101) indicated they routinely screen their patients for LTBI. Bivariate analyses using chi-square did not find any statistically significant associations with LTBI screening. A quarter of the physicians screened with an IGRA and 60% reported always offering treatment for LTBI. Isoniazid was the most common medication prescribed. A majority of respondents did not report prescribing Rifampin or Rifapentine. Follow-up after initiation of treatment was provided at least every other month by 52.7% of physicians. Conclusion There is wide variability in LTBI screening, treatment, and follow-up among our physician sample. Physicians have not yet adopted newer treatment regimens suggesting the need for an educational intervention. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Implementation of a brief screening tool to identify needs of cancer survivors.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23075-e23075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison L. McDonough ◽  
Yvonne Y. Lei ◽  
Dana Haggett ◽  
Rachel Jimenez ◽  
Katherine T. Johnston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Primary Care Clinic ◽  
Qualitative Assessment ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Care Clinic

e23075 Background: Innovation in health care delivery is needed to improve care for cancer survivors. We report a pragmatic study intended to evaluate our experience with adopting screening guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) to the routine care of breast cancer survivors in primary care and oncology follow up. Methods: We adapted the NCCN recommended screening questions into a plain language self-administered 1 page intake questionnaire. The tool was administered to a convenience sample of female breast cancer survivors in routine follow-up at an oncology or primary care clinic from September through December 2018. Domains included symptoms, lifestyle concerns, and financial issues. Frequency of concerns was assessed as “never”, “rarely”, “sometimes”, “very frequently” and “always”. We dichotomized results and evaluated feasibility of administration, prevalence of reported symptoms and qualitative assessment of burden as well as utility of the tool among participating clinicians. Results: 165 out of 169 patients offered the questionnaire participated (98%). Office staff provided the questionnaire at routine visits without notable impact on clinic flow. Most commonly endorsed concerns (sometimes or more) were: desire to improve fitness or nutrition (80%), worry about cancer recurrence (72%), and problems with sleep (57%). A majority also reported feeling nervous or worried (55%) and aches or pains in limbs or joints (55%). Several issues known to be underreported in clinic visits were endorsed including lack of satisfaction with sexual function (30% sometimes or more, 12% very often or always) and difficulty remembering things (47% sometimes or more, 13% very often or always). Among 7 participating clinicians, the tool was deemed useful and not burdensome. Several noted that it led to discussing issues that may not otherwise have been addressed. Suggestions included systematically identifying resources and strategies to address common issues and incorporating the tool into the electronic health record to increase utility. Conclusions: Screening for individual needs among survivors is feasible and efficient and may identify prevalent issues that otherwise can be missed in routine survivorship care.

377 Insomnia Treatment Practices of Primary Care Providers in Primary Care Settings

SLEEP ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. A150-A150
Author(s):  
Cassandra Godzik ◽  
Adam Sorscher
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Clinic ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Sleep Medicine ◽  
Quality Metrics ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Daytime Functioning ◽  
Care Clinic

Abstract Introduction Insomnia is highly prevalent in adult populations, with rates found to be between 10% and 40% as reported in a metanalysis conducted by Zhang et al. (2019). Insomnia is associated with worsened health outcomes and increased healthcare utilization. Primary care providers (PCPs) are the first point of contact for most people seeking treatment for insomnia. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine has proposed six quality metrics for the evaluation and treatment of insomnia (Edinger et al., 2015). In this study, we investigate how often primary care providers meet these quality metrics when they encounter a patient with a new complaint of insomnia. Methods We reviewed the charts of adult patients seen in our primary care clinic department with a new presenting complaint of insomnia between 2014–2016. The clinic notes were scored to see if any of the six metrics of quality care for insomnia as proposed by the AASM were addressed in the index appointment (T1) and in follow up appointments (T2) within three months. Results Demographic variables were analyzed (N=155; 48 males, 107 females); mean age 64 years (range 24–98). We found that PCPs documented the following: at T1, assessment of sleep quality (68%), evidence-based treatment provided (82%), daytime functioning assessed (19%), and adverse side effects assessed (11%). 29% of subjects returned for a follow up visit with 3 months. At T2, there was an assessment of sleep satisfaction/quality (40%), and of improved daytime functioning (87%). Conclusion Presently, evaluation and treatment of insomnia by PCPs is not standardized. By identifying how providers address insomnia in practice, we can develop interventions to help promote adherence to the national guidelines for treatment of insomnia in a non-sleep medicine healthcare setting. Support (if any) Dr. Cassandra M. Godzik’s Postdoctoral Research Fellowship: NIMH - T32 MH073553

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document