Objective For large, integrated healthcare delivery systems, coordinating patient care across delivery systems with providers external to the system presents challenges. We explored the domains and requirements for care coordination by professionals across healthcare systems and developed an agenda for research, practice and policy. Design The modified Delphi approach convened a 2-day stakeholder panel with moderated virtual discussions, preceded and followed by online surveys. Setting The work addresses care coordination across healthcare systems. We introduced common care scenarios and differentiated recommendations for a large (main) healthcare organisation and external healthcare professionals that contribute additional care. Participants The panel composition included health service providers, decision makers, patients and care community, and researchers. Discussions were informed by a rapid review of tested approaches to fostering collaboration, facilitating care coordination and improving communication across healthcare systems. Outcome measures The study planned to formulate a research agenda, implications for practice and recommendations for policy. Results For research recommendations, we found consensus for developing measures of shared care, exploring healthcare professionals’ needs in different care scenarios and evaluating patient experiences. Agreed practice recommendations included educating external professionals about issues specific to the patients in the main healthcare system, educating professionals within the main healthcare system about the roles and responsibilities of all involved parties, and helping patients better understand the pros and cons of within-system and out-of-system care. Policy recommendations included supporting time for professionals with high overlap in patients to engage regularly and sustaining support for care coordination for high-need patients. Conclusions Recommendations from the stakeholder panel created an agenda to foster further research, practice and policy innovations in cross-system care coordination.

Background: College athletes are a group often affected by anxiety. Few interventional studies have been conducted to address the anxiety issues in this population. Objective: We conducted a mobile-delivered mindfulness intervention among college athletes to study its feasibility and efficacy in lowering their anxiety level and improving their mindfulness (measured by the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire [FFMQ]). Methods: In April 2019, we recruited 290 college athletes from a public university in Shanghai, China, and 288 of them were randomized into an intervention group and a control group (closed trial), with the former (n=150) receiving a therapist-guided, smartphone-delivered mindfulness-based intervention and the latter receiving mental health promotion messages (n=138). We offered in-person instructions during the orientation session for the intervention group in a classroom, with the therapist interacting with the participants on the smartphone platform later during the intervention. We used generalized linear modeling and the intent-to-treat approach to compare the 2 groups' outcomes in dispositional anxiety, precompetition anxiety, and anxiety during competition, plus the 5 dimensions of mindfulness (measured by the FFMQ). Results: Our intent-to-treat analysis and generalized linear modeling found no significant difference in dispositional anxiety, precompetition anxiety, or anxiety during competition. Only the “observation” facet of mindfulness measures had a notable difference between the changes experienced by the 2 groups, whereby the intervention group had a net gain of .214 yet fell short of reaching statistical significance (P=.09). Participants who specialized in group sports had a higher level of anxiety (β=.19; SE=.08), a lower level of “nonjudgemental inner experience” in FFMQ (β=–.07; SE=.03), and a lower level of “nonreactivity” (β=–.138; SE=.052) than those specializing in individual sports. Conclusions: No significant reduction in anxiety was detected in this study. Based on the participant feedback, the time availability for mindfulness practice and session attendance for these student athletes in an elite college could have compromised the intervention’s effectiveness. Future interventions among this population could explore a more student-friendly time schedule (eg, avoid final exam time) or attempt to improve cognitive and scholastic outcomes. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1900024449; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=40865

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic era saw numerous treatments authorized for emergency use by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The purpose of the review was to determine if convalescent plasma, antivirals, or monoclonal antibodies are associated with serious adverse events (SAEs) and, if so, which specific populations are at risk. Methods: PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the FDA submission database were searched through December 2023, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines, international COVID Network Meta-analysis database, and systematic reviews were reference mined to identify controlled studies with at least 1 US site. Reviewers abstracted study characteristics, number of patients experiencing each type of SAE, and methods of adverse event collection and reporting. Results: Fifty-four studies met inclusion criteria, including 31 randomized controlled trials. We found insufficient evidence of association of any SAE with antivirals and spike protein receptor-binding antibodies. In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, the monoclonal antibody tocilizumab, an interleukin 6 inhibitor, may be associated with elevated risk of neutropenia (moderate certainty) and infection (limited certainty). Convalescent plasma may be associated with thrombotic events (limited certainty) as well as bleeding events and infection in patients with hematologic cancers (moderate certainty). Inclusion of studies without a US site could potentially change the findings. Conclusions: Severe COVID-19 infection may have serious consequences, especially in hospitalized patients with comorbidities. These consequences may be confused with toxicities of the interventions. Based on our analysis, approved treatments for COVID-19 should be prescribed as clinically indicated, although continued vigilance is warranted to identify rare and potentially significant toxicities that may arise in clinical practice. Clinical Trials Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42023467821).

BACKGROUND College athletes are a group often affected by anxiety. Few interventional studies have been conducted to address the anxiety issues in this population. OBJECTIVE We conducted a mobile-delivered mindfulness intervention among college athletes to study its feasibility and efficacy in lowering their anxiety level and improving their mindfulness (measured by the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire [FFMQ]). METHODS In April 2019, we recruited 290 college athletes from a public university in Shanghai, China, and 288 of them were randomized into an intervention group and a control group (closed trial), with the former (n=150) receiving a therapist-guided, smartphone-delivered mindfulness-based intervention and the latter receiving mental health promotion messages (n=138). We offered in-person instructions during the orientation session for the intervention group in a classroom, with the therapist interacting with the participants on the smartphone platform later during the intervention. We used generalized linear modeling and the intent-to-treat approach to compare the 2 groups' outcomes in dispositional anxiety, precompetition anxiety, and anxiety during competition, plus the 5 dimensions of mindfulness (measured by the FFMQ). RESULTS Our intent-to-treat analysis and generalized linear modeling found no significant difference in dispositional anxiety, precompetition anxiety, or anxiety during competition. Only the “observation” facet of mindfulness measures had a notable difference between the changes experienced by the 2 groups, whereby the intervention group had a net gain of .214 yet fell short of reaching statistical significance (P=.09). Participants who specialized in group sports had a higher level of anxiety (β=.19; SE=.08), a lower level of “nonjudgemental inner experience” in FFMQ (β=–.07; SE=.03), and a lower level of “nonreactivity” (β=–.138; SE=.052) than those specializing in individual sports. CONCLUSIONS No significant reduction in anxiety was detected in this study. Based on the participant feedback, the time availability for mindfulness practice and session attendance for these student athletes in an elite college could have compromised the intervention’s effectiveness. Future interventions among this population could explore a more student-friendly time schedule (eg, avoid final exam time) or attempt to improve cognitive and scholastic outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1900024449; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=40865