Family perspectives on provider conversations about housing needs for children with medical complexity

BACKGROUND

Children with medical complexity (CMC) have unique, and often unmet, housing needs that place them at risk for housing insecurity and poor health outcomes. Yet, little is known about how families with CMC discuss their housing needs with healthcare providers. We sought to understand: (1) how housing is currently discussed between CMC caregivers and healthcare providers, and (2) how CMC caregivers want such conversations to occur.

METHODS

From August to November 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews with parents/guardians of CMC (<26 years old) in Maryland as part of a larger study to understand their housing experience. Four questions on communication with providers about housing were developed a priori and included in this analysis. Qualitative content analysis was applied to interview transcripts.

RESULTS

Among 31 completed interviews, most participants were female (90%), lived in single-family homes (68%) and were from a mix of neighbourhood types (urban 19%, suburban 58%, rural 22%). Their children ranged in age from 6 months to 22 years, had a mix of insurance types (public 65%, private 29%, both 6%) and nearly all required medical equipment or technology. Four themes emerged: (1) Current housing conversations are rare and superficial, (2) Ideal housing conversations would result in thoughtful care plans and concrete supports, (3) Frequency and initiation of housing conversations are best tailored to family preferences and (4) Value of housing conversations are limited by lack of provider knowledge and time.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversations about housing needs for CMC happen in limited ways with healthcare providers, despite a desire on the part of their caregivers. Such conversations can give meaningful insights into the family's specific housing challenges, allowing providers to appropriately tailor care plans and referrals. Future work is needed to capture provider perspectives, design CMC-specific housing screeners and develop interdisciplinary referral strategies.

Layperson Perception of Reflux-Related Symptoms

Objective

To assess for differences of intended meaning in the description of reflux-related symptoms among otolaryngology patients and clinicians.

Study Design

Cross-sectional survey-based study.

Setting

Five tertiary, academic otolaryngology practices.

Methods

Between June 2020 and July 2022, a questionnaire consisting of 20 common descriptors of reflux-related symptoms within four domains (throat-, chest-, stomach-, and sensory-related symptoms) was completed by patients. Attending otolaryngologists at five academic medical centers then completed the same survey. The primary outcome was to assess differences in patient and clinician perceptions of reflux-related symptoms. Differences based on geographic location was a secondary outcome.

Results

A total of 324 patients and 27 otolaryngologists participated. Patients selected a median of six terms compared with 10.5 for otolaryngologists (p < .001). Otolaryngologists were more likely to select sensory symptoms (difference: 35.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.2%, 52.4%), throat-related symptoms (32.4%; 21.2, 43.6%), and chest-related symptoms (12.4%; 8.8, 15.9). Otolaryngologists and patients were equally likely to consider stomach symptoms as related to reflux (4.0%, -3.7%, 11.7%). No significant differences were identified based on geographic location.

Conclusion

There are differences between otolaryngologists and their patients in the interpretation of the symptoms of reflux. Patients tended to have a narrower interpretation of reflux with symptoms primarily limited to classic stomach-related symptoms, while clinicians tended to have a broader definition of reflux that included extra-esophageal manifestations of disease. This has important counseling implications for the clinician, as patients presenting with reflux symptoms may not comprehend the relationship of those symptoms to reflux disease.

Classification of patient- and clinician-generated secure messages using a theory-based taxonomy

BACKGROUND

As secure electronic message exchange increases between patients and clinicians, we must explore and understand how patients and clinicians use those messages to communicate between clinical visits.

OBJECTIVE

To present the application of a taxonomy developed specifically to code secure message content in a way that allows for identification of patient and clinician communication functions demonstrated to be associated with patients' intermediate and health outcomes.

METHOD

We randomly sampled 1031 patients who sent and received 18 309 messages and coded those messages with codes from our taxonomy. We present the prevalence of each taxon (ie, code) within the sample.

RESULTS

The most common taxon among initial patient-generated messages were Information seeking (29.09%), followed by Scheduling requests (27.91%), and Prescription requests (23.09%). Over half of subsequent patient-generated messages included responses to clinic staffs' questions (58.31%). Six in 10 clinic staff responses included some form of Information sharing with process-based responses being most common (32.81%). A third of all clinician-generated messages (36.28%) included acknowledgement or some level of fulfilment of a patient's task-oriented request. Clinic staff sought information from patients in 20.54% of their messages.

CONCLUSION

This taxonomy is the first step toward examining whether secure messaging communication can be associated with patients' health outcomes. Knowing which content is positively associated with outcomes can support training of, and targeted responses from, clinicians with the goal of generating message content designed to improve outcomes.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

This study is based on analyses of patient-initiated secure message threads.