News Article | May 23, 2017
Findings from the first ever American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association (ASDSA) Patient-Centered/Directed Outcomes for Skin Cancer Roundtable were recently published by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) prior to its annual meeting. The roundtable – funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) – focuses on skin cancer treatments and patient satisfaction. “ASDSA is thrilled ASCO recognized the importance of including the patient perspective in skin cancer treatment,” said ASDSA President Thomas Rohrer, MD. “This data gives qualitative information on the specific concerns of skin cancer patients, which has contributed positively to patient and medical research literature and merited the need for further study.” Along with external partners, the American Cancer Society, the Cancer Support Community and the Partnership to Improve Patient Care, ASDSA recognized the unmet need of hearing the patient’s voice on what they thought was most important regarding the outcomes of their skin cancer treatments. Patients at the August 2016 summit wanted to be involved in the decision-making process and had high expectations for physician-patient communication. The group also rated patient education as an expectation during their skin cancer treatment. Additional findings showed that most patients were concerned about the ability to return to normal function, scarring from treatment and concern of subsequent tumors or recurrence of the primary tumor, as high priority areas for patients undergoing skin cancer treatment. To further the research, ASDSA is currently applying for an additional contract to study non-melanoma skin cancer in patients over the age of 65 and patients who have been diagnosed with genetic skin cancer syndromes. About ASDSA With a membership of over 6,100 physicians, the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, a 501(c) (6) association, speaks in a unified voice to advocate, promote and advance dermatology surgery and its patients. For more information, visit asdsa.asds.net or email advocacy(at)asds(dot)net.
News Article | May 12, 2017
SAN FRANCISCO - The patient-centered study's premise was straightforward: Since there is a definite link between parents' psychosocial stress levels and asthma suffered by inner city kids, if you provide stressed-out parents effective coping skills, would kids take their medicines more regularly and would their health improve? A $2.2 million, first-of-its kind randomized study found no differences between kids with asthma who received standard care based on National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines compared with kids whose parents received stress-mitigation techniques in addition to evidence-based asthma care. The stress-mitigation techniques were designed by a team at Children's National Health System funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. "While it is somewhat disappointing that we did not demonstrate a treatment effect from the parental stress-mitigation techniques, the good news for children suffering from asthma is that all study participants experienced significant increases in symptom-free days, and that's because the NIH guidelines provide state-of-the-art care," says Stephen J. Teach, M.D., M.P.H., who presented the findings May 6 during the 2017 annual meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies. "Kids in both arms of the study responded well to guideline-based care. The NIH guidelines continue to improve children's health, even for high-risk kids with asthma." The study team recruited pairs of parents and African American children aged 4 to 12 who had asthma. Sixty percent of the kids were male; their mean age was 6.6 years old. Of the 217 parent/child dyads, 110 were randomized to receive standard care while 107 kids received guideline-based care while their parents participated in four individual sessions with a Community Wellness Coach working on deep breathing, mindfulness and self-care. Those one-on-one sessions over three months were accompanied by twice-monthly group sessions and supportive text messages over six months. Nearly 92 percent of parents were "very satisfied" with the stress-mitigation techniques. Days free of asthma symptoms, the primary health outcome researchers tracked among kids, increased significantly for all kids with no significant difference between the two groups. Likewise, six months after the intervention ended when the research team looked at emergency department visits, courses of systemic steroids used, and reported use of inhaled steroids, they saw no difference between the groups. Even examining parental depression and stress levels revealed no significant difference among the two groups of parents. "The patient-centered intervention was very well received by participants in the single-blind clinical trial. Everyone loved it. Parents have given me hugs in the hallway," adds Dr. Teach, director and principal investigator of IMPACT DC, a care, research and advocacy program focused on under-resourced and largely minority children with asthma. "Still, psychosocial stress-mitigation interventions targeting the parents of at-risk children with asthma did not improve children's asthma outcomes beyond providing NIH guideline-based clinical care alone."
News Article | November 17, 2016
CINCINNATI - In some good news for families of children recovering from complex pneumonia, doctors recommend in a study published by Pediatrics it's better to send kids home from the hospital with oral instead of intravenous antibiotics. Children with complex pneumonia typically require one to three weeks of antibiotic therapy after hospital discharge to treat residual infection. The relief of going home without a needle and tube stuck to a child's arm also comes with other benefits, according to a multi-institutional research team led by Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. Appearing in the journal's Nov. 17 eFirst edition, the retrospective study of 2,123 children at 36 hospitals found oral antibiotics are as effective as intravenous in managing residual disease. Taking medication by mouth also avoids the risk of infection and other medical complications from peripherally inserted central venous catheters, or PICC lines. "PICC line complications can be serious, resulting in hospital readmission, additional procedures, and more medications, as well as missed work or school." says Samir Shah, MD, MSCE, the study's lead author and director of Hospital Medicine at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. "It's not surprising that children and families would rather not use PICC lines. Our findings, which provide compelling evidence to support the use of oral antibiotics for children with complex pneumonia, will contribute to safer care for children across the country." The paper is the first multi-center research project to look at the issue. The study is a collaboration of the Pediatric Research in Inpatient Settings Network -- a group of pediatric hospitalists focused on improving care delivery to children. About 15 percent of children hospitalized for pneumonia develop complicated pneumonia, which includes the buildup of fluid around the lungs caused by pleural infection, according to the authors. National treatment guidelines do not call for the use oral antibiotics after leaving the hospital, although they do highlight the risk of giving the medicine intravenously. The researchers report that although PICC use is overall not common, they found substantial variation in post-discharge use across the 36 hospitals in the study with almost three-fourths of children at some hospitals receiving antibiotics by PICC for complex pneumonia. An important goal of the research is helping reduce what the authors call "unwarranted variation" or differences in care that are not related to the child's illness or underlying medical conditions. Of the 2,123 children in the study, 281 (13.2 percent) received antibiotics through a PICC line after release from the hospital, with the rest getting oral antibiotics. Treatment failure rates were not significantly different between the groups -- with 3.2 percent failure rate for kids on a PICC line and 2.6 percent for the oral antibiotics group. PICC-related complications occurred in 7.1 percent of children in that group; adverse drug reactions were recorded for 0.6 percent of children taking oral medication. This led the authors to conclude that children with complicated pneumonia should "preferentially receive" oral antibiotics when released from the hospital when effective oral options are available. Funding support for the study came from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (grant # 4252940000).
News Article | November 16, 2016
WASHINGTON, DC--(Marketwired - November 16, 2016) - Suzanne Groah, MD, MSPH, has been awarded a $500,000 grant by the Craig H. Neilsen Foundation to support screening for urinary tract infections (UTIs) among patients with spinal cord injuries at MedStar National Rehabilitation Network. "Urinary tract infection is the most common bacterial infection seen in the outpatient setting and the most common healthcare-associated infection, making it a major worldwide public health problem," said Dr. Groah. In addition, spinal cord injury patients are at high risk for recurrent UTI, which is known to cause significant pain and discomfort; however, mobility limitations often create barriers to these patients receiving comprehensive care. The study, "Development of a Urinary Symptom Questionnaire for People with Neuropathic Bladder," will develop a questionnaire for individuals being treated for bladder dysfunction due to spinal cord injury to assist them in self-assessments of their health. The process of creating the questionnaire is centered on working with patients with spinal cord injuries, focusing on utilizing their feedback to develop usable tools for others through focus groups and interviews. Focus groups will help develop the questionnaire, which will be validated and assessed by a large, diverse, national sample of people living with spinal cord injury. The goal is that other patients will be able to use the tool to self-assess if their symptoms may be related to a UTI. "When the study team surveyed people with neuropathic bladder due to spinal cord injury and spina bifida, we found that UTI is a problem for more than 80 percent of people," Dr. Groah said. By creating this tool, Dr. Groah's research team will have an enhanced diagnostic approach to UTIs within this population that will be useful in future research, clinical care, patient education, and patient and clinical decision-making. This research is building on a study that currently is recruiting patients, "The Impact of Self-Management with Probiotics on Urinary Symptoms and the Urine Microbiome in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury and Spina Bifida," which was funded by a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute grant in 2014. Dr. Groah is the director of Spinal Cord Injury Consultation Liaison Service and of Spinal Cord Injury Research at MedStar National Rehabilitation Network and associate professor of rehabilitation medicine at Georgetown University. The Craig H. Neilsen Foundation's funding is dedicated to supporting both programs and scientific research to improve the quality of life for those affected by and living with spinal cord injury. The MedStar Health Research Institute is the research arm of MedStar Health, the largest healthcare provider in Maryland and the Washington, D.C., region. MHRI provides scientific, administrative and regulatory support for research programs throughout the MedStar Health system. MHRI's expertise includes translational research into disease prevention, diagnosis and treatment. These programs complement the key clinical services and teaching programs in the 10 MedStar hospitals and other MedStar entities. For more information, visit MedStarResearch.org. MedStar Health is a not-for-profit health system dedicated to caring for people in Maryland and the Washington, D.C., region, while advancing the practice of medicine through education, innovation and research. MedStar's 30,000 associates, 6,000 affiliated physicians, 10 hospitals, ambulatory care and urgent care centers, and the MedStar Health Research Institute are recognized regionally and nationally for excellence in medical care. As the medical education and clinical partner of Georgetown University, MedStar trains more than 1,100 medical residents annually. MedStar Health's patient-first philosophy combines care, compassion and clinical excellence with an emphasis on customer service. For more information, visit MedStarHealth.org
News Article | November 21, 2016
PASADENA, Calif., November 21, 2016 -- Medicare Advantage patients who had tailored post-hospital visits with primary care clinicians, known as POSH visits, were less likely to experience hospital readmission than those who did not have an outpatient visit, according to a Kaiser Permanente study published today in JAMA Internal Medicine. Tailored POSH visits are scheduled for the patient while he or she is still in the hospital and focus on following up on treatment plans after discharge. In comparison, regular primary care clinician outpatient visits may focus on routine care and not cover specific issues related to a patient's recent hospitalization. Researchers found that Medicare Advantage patients who had one or more outpatient visits with primary care clinicians within seven days of being discharged from the hospital to their homes were 12 to 24 percent less likely to experience hospital readmission than those who did not have an outpatient visit. And patients who had a POSH visit were 28 percent less likely to experience hospital readmission, compared to those completing any other type of outpatient visit. "While other studies had mixed results regarding the effectiveness of post-hospitalization visits, our study highlights the value of both routine and more tailored POSH visits in ensuring continuity of care once a patient transitions from hospital to home," said Ernest Shen, PhD, research scientist biostatistician at the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Department of Research & Evaluation. "Although any primary care clinician outpatient visit appeared to reduce readmission risk compared to no outpatient visit, the POSH visit provides the added benefit of the care team being alerted to, and therefore better prepared to address, patients' post-discharge needs." The study examined the electronic health records of more than 71,000 Medicare Advantage patients who were discharged to home from Kaiser Permanente hospitals between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2014. To address the potential bias that patients who had an outpatient visit may have been less sick than those who did not, the researchers accounted for several important factors, including severity of the condition during hospitalization, underlying illnesses and functional status. Other authors of the study include Brian Mittman, PhD, and Huong Q. Nguyen, PhD, RN, from the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Department of Research & Evaluation; Sandra Y. Koyama, MD, Dan N. Huynh, MD, Heather L. Watson, MBA, and Michael H. Kanter, MD, from Clinical Operations, Kaiser Permanente Southern California. This study was partially supported through a collaboration with Project ACHIEVE, a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) awardee (TC-1403-14049), and internal operational funding from Kaiser Permanente Southern California. About the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Department of Research & Evaluation The Department of Research & Evaluation conducts high-quality, innovative research into disease etiology, prevention, treatment and care delivery. Investigators conduct epidemiologic research, health services research, biostatistics research, and behavioral research as well as clinical trials. Major areas of study include chronic disease, infectious disease, cancer, drug safety and effectiveness, and maternal and child health. Headquartered in Pasadena, California, the department focuses on translating research to practice quickly to benefit the health and lives of Kaiser Permanente Southern California members and the general public. Visit kp.org/research. Kaiser Permanente is committed to helping shape the future of health care. We are recognized as one of America's leading health care providers and not-for-profit health plans. Founded in 1945, Kaiser Permanente has a mission to provide high-quality, affordable health care services and to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve. We currently serve more than 10.6 million members in eight states and the District of Columbia. Care for members and patients is focused on their total health and guided by their personal physicians, specialists and team of caregivers. Our expert and caring medical teams are empowered and supported by industry-leading technology advances and tools for health promotion, disease prevention, state-of-the-art care delivery and world-class chronic disease management. Kaiser Permanente is dedicated to care innovations, clinical research, health education and the support of community health. For more information, go to: kp.org/share.
News Article | November 17, 2016
Concerns about weight gain may be driving contraception choices, according to Penn State College of Medicine researchers. Women who are overweight or obese are less likely than women who are not overweight or obese to use the birth control pill and other hormonal contraceptive methods. Weight gain is one of the most commonly cited reasons why women stop using hormonal contraception, and therefore may play a role in the risk of unintended pregnancies, said Cynthia H. Chuang, professor of medicine and public health sciences. Although oral contraception likely does not cause weight gain, says Chuang, many women attribute increasing weight with the birth control pill. The birth control shot has been associated with weight gain in younger women. Chuang and her co-researchers wanted to learn if women's weight or their perception of weight influenced the type of birth control they used, if any. To do so, they examined demographic and survey data from almost 1,000 privately insured women in Pennsylvania. The researchers categorized weight category based on body mass index (BMI), a measure of body size based on height and weight. They determined that overweight and obese women were more likely than women who are not overweight or obese to choose forms of birth control known as long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs), and less likely to use methods like the pill, the shot, the patch and the ring. There was also a trend toward overweight and obese women to be more likely to use non-prescription methods such as condoms, withdrawal and natural family planning, or no method. The researchers will report their results in the journal Contraception. Long-acting reversible contraceptives include intrauterine devices, commonly known as IUDs, and the contraceptive implant. LARCs do not contain estrogen, which some some women believe causes weight gain. "What we think may be happening is that women who are overweight and obese may be more likely to choose methods other than the pill or the shot because of fear of weight gain," Chuang said. "As a result, they are choosing both more effective methods (LARCS) and less effective, non-prescription methods." Researchers found that 23 percent of overweight and 21 percent of obese women used LARCs, which are the most effective forms of birth control. In contrast, only 6 percent of under-weight and normal-weight women used LARCs in the study. "We were actually glad to see that overweight and obese women were at least more likely to choose LARCs because I was expecting to see these women more likely to use non-prescription methods," Chuang said. Heavier women also were more likely than normal-weight women to use less-effective non-prescription birth control methods -- such as condoms -- or no method at all. However, these results did not reach statistical significance, Chuang said. The researchers also evaluated whether perception of weight influenced contraceptive choice. In the study, half of the women perceived themselves to be overweight, although only around 42 percent of them were overweight or obese based on BMI. This perception, however, did not appear to influence birth control choice. "Women may be worried about weight gain when they're making decisions about birth control, so clinicians need to be aware of that," Chung said. "It could be an opportunity to counsel women about LARCs, which are more effective forms of contraception." Other researchers on this project were Kalpesh Bhuva and Erik B. Lehman, Department of Public Health Sciences; and Jennifer L. Kraschnewski, Division of General Internal Medicine and Department of Public Health Sciences. A Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Program Award funded this research. Penn State Clinical and Translational Science Institute supported this research.
News Article | December 5, 2016
ROCHESTER, Minn. -- Using a shared decision-making aid to involve patients more in their own care decisions can prevent unnecessary hospitalization or advanced cardiac tests for patients reporting low-risk chest pain -- for the cost of about 1 minute of time. So says a study from Mayo Clinic researchers, published online today in The BMJ. MULTIMEDIA ALERT: Video and audio are available for download on the Mayo Clinic News Network. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the second highest cause of emergency department visits is chest pain. "Chest pain can be caused by a wide variety of problems," says Erik Hess, M.D., study lead author and emergency medicine physician at Mayo Clinic. "While we recommend that people seek immediate medical help when experiencing chest pain, the next steps can vary - and be unnecessarily costly." Patients at low risk for acute coronary syndrome - a range of conditions that includes a heart attack and is associated with sudden, reduced blood flow to the heart - are frequently admitted for observation and cardiac testing. Dr. Hess and his colleagues say this is because, "Given the potential for missing a diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, clinicians have a very low risk threshold to admit patients for observation and advanced cardiac testing." "Despite little possibility that these low-risk patients are experiencing acute coronary syndrome, emergency physicians are more likely to default to admission for observation and additional testing," says Dr. Hess. "This presents a substantial unnecessary burden and cost to the patient and the health care system." The research team felt that introducing a shared decision-making approach might not only increase patients' understanding of their symptoms and risks, but also allow them to participate more actively in deciding whether hospital admission and advanced cardiac testing were necessary. Using the Chest Pain Choice decision aid, emergency department physicians and patients with low-risk chest pain can estimate the risk for acute coronary syndrome within the next 45 days. Based on that risk, they can then have a joint discussion on whether hospital admission and advanced cardiac testing is warranted, or whether a follow-up appointment with primary care or cardiology is a more appropriate step. In a randomized clinical trial across six emergency departments in five states, the researchers compared usual care for 447 patients to 451 patients receiving the Chest Pain Choice decision aid intervention. The primary outcome, selected by patient and caregiver representatives, was patient knowledge. Secondary outcomes were involvement in the decision to be admitted, proportion of patients admitted for cardiac testing, and the 30-day rate of major adverse cardiac events. The team showed that using the decision aid resulted in: Both patients and physicians were satisfied with the decision aid and its use, which, according to the study authors, "took an average of one additional minute of clinician time." Shared decision-making resulted in significantly less overuse of hospitalization and advanced cardiac testing, thereby reducing the overall burden on the health care system, as well as potential costs for patients. "When patients are involved with their care decisions, it is more likely they will get the right care for their concerns," says Dr. Hess. "We believe that the Chest Pain Choice decision aid will make it easier for patients and physicians to have a thoughtful discussion and make an individualized care plan that is less likely to overuse unnecessary services." Dr. Hess first presented the Chest Pain Choice decision aid at the American College of Cardiology's 65th Annual Scientific Session (Read news release.). The study was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery. It was conducted in collaboration with the Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit. This unit focuses much of its efforts on developing and validating shared decision aids across health care. Mayo Clinic is a nonprofit organization committed to clinical practice, education and research, providing expert, whole-person care to everyone who needs healing. For more information, visit mayoclinic.org/about-mayo-clinic and newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org.
News Article | October 27, 2016
Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 2016 - The Alliance for Aging Research (Alliance) announced today that it has been approved for a $250,000 Eugene Washington PCORI Engagement Award to create a first-ever Senior Patient and Family Caregiver Network (SP&FCN) by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). This network will address the significant under-representation of older adults and their family caregivers in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) and comparative effectiveness research (CER). PCOR informs patients and their family caregivers how to better communicate with health care providers and subsequently make more informed health care decisions. CER directly compares existing health care interventions to determine which work best for specific patients and which pose the greatest benefits and harms. "Older adults account for 36 percent of total U.S. personal health care spending and 42 percent of all prescription drug consumption and will make up 20 percent of the total population by 2030. Yet, the evidence base for treating older adults is sparse because they are underrepresented in clinical trials," says Susan Peschin, MHS, president and CEO at the Alliance and the SP&FCN project lead. "The reasons range from a high likelihood of comorbidity exclusion in research protocols, to perceived financial issues and transportation challenges, to a fear of the science and the system. Engaging senior patients and their family caregivers will open a window into how such barriers impact access to effective treatments and services." The Alliance's SP&FCN will focus on barriers researchers face to conduct PCOR/CER in Alzheimer's disease, sarcopenia, which is age-related, progressive loss of muscle mass and strength; atrial fibrillation; and persistent pain and disability. The main objective of the SP&FCN is to develop a patient/family caregiver-led nationwide cohort of advocates with: The SP&FCN program will be overseen by an advisory council that includes older adult patients and family caregivers, as well as leading geriatrics, cardiology, neurology, and aging research experts and future potential project partners. The network and training will be designed and implemented by patients, stakeholders, and the health care community. This integrated team will then further support training of additional patients to fully participate in PCOR/CER. The Alliance is partnering with Leidos Corporation for this project. The project is part of a portfolio of projects approved for PCORI funding to help develop a skilled community of patients and other stakeholders from across the entire health care enterprise and to involve them meaningfully in every aspect of PCORI's work. "This project was selected for Engagement Award funding not only for its commitment to engaging patients and other stakeholders, but also for its potential to increase the usefulness and trustworthiness of the information we produce and facilitate its dissemination and uptake," says Jean Slutsky, PCORI's chief engagement and dissemination officer. "We look forward to following the project's progress and working with the Alliance to share the results." The Alliance's project and the other projects approved for funding by this program were selected through a highly competitive review process in which applications were assessed for their ability to meet PCORI's engagement goals and objectives, as well as program criteria. For more information about PCORI's funding to support engagement efforts, visit http://www. . About the Alliance for Aging Research The Alliance for Aging Research is the leading nonprofit organization dedicated to accelerating the pace of scientific discoveries and their application in order to vastly improve the universal human experience of aging and health. Visit http://www. for more information. PCORI is an independent, non-profit organization authorized by Congress in 2010 to fund comparative effectiveness research that will provide patients, their caregivers, and clinicians with the evidence needed to make better-informed health and healthcare decisions. PCORI is committed to seeking input from a broad range of stakeholders to guide its work.
News Article | February 15, 2017
A national breast cancer research project has chosen Sanford Health to be the repository for the specimens collected as part of the 100,000 woman study. The five-year study is called Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures of risk, or WISDOM, and is being conducted by the Athena Breast Health Network, a collaboration among five University of California medical centers and Sanford Health’s Edith Sanford Breast Center. Investigators are studying routine annual screenings and personalized screenings based on genetic information to determine which method is more effective in reducing false positives and misdiagnoses of breast cancer. Sanford’s genomic lab will house the specimens collected from consenting women as part of this research. The study will enroll 100,000 women across the United States. Researchers from across the globe will have access to the data collected to use in other breast cancer studies. “Sanford Health has been an outstanding partner in our breast health research and clinical care initiatives here at the University of California,” said Sandy Borowsky, the principal investigator at the University of California, Davis site of Athena. “Sanford demonstrated a commitment to improving care for women through innovative thinking and the hard work of collecting data across multiple sites. Their professionalism and institutional support for a first class biospecimen lab made the choice clear. It’s a true win-win opportunity.” The Athena Breast Health Network in 2015 received a $14.1 million grant from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, or PCORI, to fund WISDOM. Edith Sanford Breast Center has been a member of Athena since 2013. Other partners include the University of California campuses in San Francisco, San Diego, Davis, Los Angeles and Irvine. “Sanford Health enjoys beneficial integration of its clinical and research operations, which has provided us the infrastructure to support the WISDOM repository,” said David Pearce, Ph.D., executive vice president for Sanford Research. “The data gathered and stored here have the potential to improve breast cancer screenings for women everywhere.” Women age 40-74 years old who have not had a prior breast cancer diagnosis and receive care at an Athena site are eligible to enroll. Edith Sanford Breast Center in Sioux Falls expects to open enrollment in early 2017. About Sanford Health Sanford Health is an integrated health system headquartered in the Dakotas. It is one of the largest health systems in the nation with 45 hospitals and nearly 300 clinics in nine states and four countries. Sanford Health’s 28,000 employees, including more than 1,300 physicians, make it the largest employer in the Dakotas. Nearly $1 billion in gifts from philanthropist Denny Sanford have allowed for several initiatives, including global children's clinics, genomic medicine and specialized centers researching cures for type 1 diabetes, breast cancer and other diseases. For more information, visit sanfordhealth.org.
News Article | February 28, 2017
NEW YORK and MIAMI, Feb. 28, 2017 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Parkinson's Foundation has received a $250,000 award to develop new patient-centered recommendations to improve the health of women living with Parkinson's disease. The funding provided through a Patient-Centered Outcomes...