Perspectives of Chinese American smoker and nonsmoker household pairs about the creating smokefree living together program.

BACKGROUND: Chinese men smoke at high rates, and this puts household members at risk for tobacco-related diseases. Culturally responsive interventions that provide education and support are needed to promote smokefree living and reduce smoke exposure, particularly for US immigrants who experience changes in smokefree social norms. This qualitative study examines perspectives of Chinese American smoker and nonsmoker household pairs in the Creating Smokefree Living Together program. METHODS: Four focus groups were conducted with 30 Chinese American participants (15 smokers and 15 nonsmokers) who, in household pairs, completed smokefree education interventions of either brief or moderate intensity. Nearly three-quarters of the smokers continued to smoke after the intervention at the time of focus group participation. All smokers were male, and most household nonsmokers were female spouses. All participants had limited English proficiency. Focus group meetings were recorded, and the recordings were translated and transcribed. Transcripts and field notes were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: The following themes, shared by smokers and nonsmokers across interventions, were identified: 1) there was a preference for dyadic and group interventions because of the support offered, 2) increased knowledge of the health harms of smoke exposure within a pair improved the nonsmoker's support for smokefree living, 3) learning communication strategies improved household relationships and assertiveness for smokefree environments, 4) biochemical feedback was useful but had short-term effects, and 5) project magnets provided cues to action. CONCLUSIONS: Involving household partners is critical to smokefree interventions. Simple reminders at home appear to be more powerful than personal biochemical feedback of smoke exposure for sustaining motivation and engagement in ongoing behavioral changes within the household. Cancer 2018;124:1599-606. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Provider Recommendations in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: An Analysis of Audio-Recorded Discussions about Vitamin D.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how providers communicate recommendations when scientific uncertainty exists. OBJECTIVES: To compare provider recommendations to those in the scientific literature, with a focus on whether uncertainty was communicated. DESIGN: Qualitative (inductive systematic content analysis) and quantitative analysis of previously collected audio-recorded provider-patient office visits. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-one providers and a socio-economically diverse convenience sample of 603 of their patients from outpatient community- and academic-based primary care, integrative medicine, and complementary and alternative medicine provider offices in Southern California. MAIN MEASURES: Comparison of provider information-giving about vitamin D to professional guidelines and scientific information for which conflicting recommendations or insufficient scientific evidence exists; certainty with which information was conveyed. RESULTS: Ninety-two (15.3 %) of 603 visit discussions touched upon issues related to vitamin D testing, management and benefits. Vitamin D deficiency screening was discussed with 23 (25 %) patients, the definition of vitamin D deficiency with 21 (22.8 %), the optimal range for vitamin D levels with 26 (28.3 %), vitamin D supplementation dosing with 50 (54.3 %), and benefits of supplementation with 46 (50 %). For each of the professional guidelines/scientific information examined, providers conveyed information that deviated from professional guidelines and the existing scientific evidence. Of 166 statements made about vitamin D in this study, providers conveyed 160 (96.4 %) with certainty, without mention of any equivocal or contradictory evidence in the scientific literature. No uncertainty was mentioned when vitamin D dosing was discussed, even when recommended dosing was higher than guideline recommendations. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Providers convey the vast majority of information and recommendations about vitamin D with certainty, even though the scientific literature contains inconsistent recommendations and declarations of inadequate evidence. Not communicating uncertainty blurs the contrast between evidence-based recommendations and those without evidence. Providers should explore best practices for involving patients in decision-making by acknowledging the uncertainty behind their recommendations.

Training Primary Care Physicians to Employ Self-Efficacy-Enhancing Interviewing Techniques: Randomized Controlled Trial of a Standardized Patient Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) have few tools for enhancing patient self-efficacy, a key mediator of myriad health-influencing behaviors. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether brief standardized patient instructor (SPI)-delivered training increases PCPs' use of self-efficacy-enhancing interviewing techniques (SEE IT). DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-two family physicians and general internists from 12 primary care offices drawn from two health systems in Northern California. INTERVENTIONS: Experimental arm PCPs received training in the use of SEE IT training during three outpatient SPI visits scheduled over a 1-month period. Control arm PCPs received a single SPI visit, during which they viewed a diabetes treatment video. All intervention visits (experimental and control) were timed to last 20 min. SPIs portrayed patients struggling with self-care of depression and diabetes in the first 7 min, then delivered the appropriate intervention content during the remaining 13 min. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was provider use of SEE IT (a count of ten behaviors), coded from three audio-recorded standardized patient visits at 1-3 months, again involving depression and diabetes self-care. Two five-point scales measured physician responses to training: Value (7 items: quality, helpfulness, understandability, relevance, feasibility, planned use, care impact), and Hassle (2 items: personal hassle, flow disruption). KEY RESULTS: Pre-intervention, study PCPs used a mean of 0.7 behaviors/visit, with no significant between-arm difference (P = 0.23). Post-intervention, experimental arm PCPs used more of the behaviors than controls (mean 2.7 vs. 1.0 per visit; adjusted difference 1.7, 95 % CI 1.1-2.2; P < 0.001). Experimental arm PCPs had higher training Value scores than controls (mean difference 1.05, 95 % CI 0.68-1.42; P < 0.001), and similarly low Hassle scores. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians receiving brief SPI-delivered training increased their use of SEE IT and found the training to be of value. Whether patients visiting SEE IT-trained physicians experience improved health behaviors and outcomes warrants study. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01618552.

Characterizing internet health information seeking strategies by socioeconomic status: a mixed methods approach.

BACKGROUND: The Internet is valuable for those with limited access to health care services because of its low cost and wealth of information. Our objectives were to investigate how the Internet is used to obtain health-related information and how individuals with differing socioeconomic resources navigate it when presented with a health decision. METHODS: Study participants were recruited from public settings and social service agencies. Participants listened to one of two clinical scenarios - consistent with influenza or bacterial meningitis - and then conducted an Internet search. Screen-capture video software captured the Internet search. Participant Internet search strategies were analyzed and coded for pre- and post-Internet search guess at diagnosis and information seeking patterns. Individuals who did not have a college degree and were recruited from locations offering social services were categorized as "lower socioeconomic status" (SES); the remainder was categorized as "higher SES." Participants were 78 Internet health information seekers, ranging from 21-35 years of age, who experienced barriers to accessing health care services. RESULTS: Lower-SES individuals were more likely to use an intuitive, rather than deliberative, approach to Internet health information seeking. Lower- and higher-SES participants did not differ in the tendency to make diagnostic guesses based on Internet searches. Lower-SES participants were more likely than their higher-SES counterparts to narrow the scope of their search. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that individuals with different levels of socioeconomic status vary in the heuristics and search patterns they rely upon to direct their searches. The influence and use of credible information in the process of making a decision is associated with education and prior experiences with healthcare services. Those with limited resources may be disadvantaged when turning to the Internet to make a health decision.

Impact of patient requests on provider-perceived visit difficulty in primary care.

BACKGROUND: "Difficult visits" are common in primary care and may contribute to primary care provider (PCP) career dissatisfaction and burnout. Patient requests occur in approximately half of primary care visits and may be a source of clinician-patient miscommunication or conflict, contributing to perceived visit difficulty. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine associations between types of patient requests and PCP-perceived visit difficulty. DESIGN: This was an observational study, nested in a multicenter randomized trial of depression engagement interventions. SUBJECTS: We included 824 patient visits within 135 PCP practices in Northern California occurring from June 2010 to March 2012. MAIN MEASURES: PCP-perceived visit difficulty was quantified using a three-item scale (relative visit difficulty, amount of effort required, and amount of time required; Cronbach's α = 0.81). Using linear regression, the difficulty scale (score range 0-2 from least to most difficult) was modeled as a function of: patient requests for diagnostics tests, pain medications, and specialist referrals; PCP perception of likely depression or likely substance abuse; patient sociodemographics, comorbidity, depression; PCP characteristics and practice setting. RESULTS: Patients requested diagnostic tests, pain medications, and specialist referrals in 37.2, 20.0 and 30.0 % of visits, respectively. After adjustment for patient medical and psychiatric complexity, perceived difficulty was significantly higher when patients requested diagnostic tests [parameter estimate (PE) 0.11, (95 % CI: 0.03, 0.20)] but not when patients requested pain medications [PE -0.04 (95 % CI: -0.15, 0.08)] or referrals [PE 0.04 (95 % CI: -0.07, 0.25)]. CONCLUSIONS: PCP-perceived visit difficulty is associated with patient requests for diagnostic tests, but not requests for pain medications or specialist referrals. In this era of "choosing wisely," PCPs may be challenged to respond to diagnostic test requests in an evidence-based manner, while maintaining the provider-patient relationship and PCP career satisfaction.

The eHealth Enhanced Chronic Care Model: a theory derivation approach.

BACKGROUND: Chronic illnesses are significant to individuals and costly to society. When systematically implemented, the well-established and tested Chronic Care Model (CCM) is shown to improve health outcomes for people with chronic conditions. Since the development of the original CCM, tremendous information management, communication, and technology advancements have been established. An opportunity exists to improve the time-honored CCM with clinically efficacious eHealth tools. OBJECTIVE: The first goal of this paper was to review research on eHealth tools that support self-management of chronic disease using the CCM. The second goal was to present a revised model, the eHealth Enhanced Chronic Care Model (eCCM), to show how eHealth tools can be used to increase efficiency of how patients manage their own chronic illnesses. METHODS: Using Theory Derivation processes, we identified a "parent theory", the Chronic Care Model, and conducted a thorough review of the literature using CINAHL, Medline, OVID, EMBASE PsychINFO, Science Direct, as well as government reports, industry reports, legislation using search terms "CCM or Chronic Care Model" AND "eHealth" or the specific identified components of eHealth. Additionally, "Chronic Illness Self-management support" AND "Technology" AND several identified eHealth tools were also used as search terms. We then used a review of the literature and specific components of the CCM to create the eCCM. RESULTS: We identified 260 papers at the intersection of technology, chronic disease self-management support, the CCM, and eHealth and organized a high-quality subset (n=95) using the components of CCM, self-management support, delivery system design, clinical decision support, and clinical information systems. In general, results showed that eHealth tools make important contributions to chronic care and the CCM but that the model requires modification in several key areas. Specifically, (1) eHealth education is critical for self-care, (2) eHealth support needs to be placed within the context of community and enhanced with the benefits of the eCommunity or virtual communities, and (3) a complete feedback loop is needed to assure productive technology-based interactions between the patient and provider. CONCLUSIONS: The revised model, eCCM, offers insight into the role of eHealth tools in self-management support for people with chronic conditions. Additional research and testing of the eCCM are the logical next steps.

Characterizing the Processes for Navigating Internet Health Information Using Real-Time Observations: A Mixed-Methods Approach.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the processes people use to find health-related information on the Internet or the individual characteristics that shape selection of information-seeking approaches. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to describe the processes by which users navigate the Internet for information about a hypothetical acute illness and to identify individual characteristics predictive of their information-seeking strategies. METHODS: Study participants were recruited from public settings and agencies. Interested individuals were screened for eligibility using an online questionnaire. Participants listened to one of two clinical scenarios­consistent with influenza or bacterial meningitis­and then conducted an Internet search. Screen-capture video software captured Internet search mouse clicks and keystrokes. Each step of the search was coded as hypothesis testing (etiology), evidence gathering (symptoms), or action/treatment seeking (behavior). The coded steps were used to form a step-by-step pattern of each participant's information-seeking process. A total of 78 Internet health information seekers ranging from 21-35 years of age and who experienced barriers to accessing health care services participated. RESULTS: We identified 27 unique patterns of information seeking, which were grouped into four overarching classifications based on the number of steps taken during the search, whether a pattern consisted of developing a hypothesis and exploring symptoms before ending the search or searching an action/treatment, and whether a pattern ended with action/treatment seeking. Applying dual-processing theory, we categorized the four overarching pattern classifications as either System 1 (41%, 32/78), unconscious, rapid, automatic, and high capacity processing; or System 2 (59%, 46/78), conscious, slow, and deliberative processing. Using multivariate regression, we found that System 2 processing was associated with higher education and younger age. CONCLUSIONS: We identified and classified two approaches to processing Internet health information. System 2 processing, a methodical approach, most resembles the strategies for information processing that have been found in other studies to be associated with higher-quality decisions. We conclude that the quality of Internet health-information seeking could be improved through consumer education on methodical Internet navigation strategies and the incorporation of decision aids into health information websites.

e-Patients Perceptions of Using Personal Health Records for Self-management Support of Chronic Illness.

Chronic illness self-management is largely moving from healthcare professionals and into the hands of the patient. One tool that has been promoted to facilitate self-management support of chronic illness by policymakers, health advocates, providers, and consumers is the personal health record. Little is known about how consumers effectively use personal health records for self-management support and for productive patient-provider interactions. The purpose of this study was to learn from chronically ill engaged, experienced, and educated (e-patient) adults how and why they use personal health records for self-management support and productive patient-provider interactions. Eighteen purposively selected consumers were interviewed in two communities. Qualitative description methods were used, and we used a grounded theory approach to analyzing interview data, which was digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. We identified four major thematic categories that capture the perceptions of the chronically ill using personal health records: (1) patient engagement and health self-management, (2) access to and control over personal health data, (3) promotion of productive communication, and (4) opportunities for training and education. Knowledge gained from the e-patient personal health record users suggest that making improvements to the portal system and providing education to consumers and providers will increase the utility among the experienced users and encourage new users to embrace adoption and use.

Twenty years post-NIH Revitalization Act: enhancing minority participation in clinical trials (EMPaCT): laying the groundwork for improving minority clinical trial accrual: renewing the case for enhancing minority participation in cancer clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Revitalization Act of 1993 mandated the appropriate inclusion of minorities in all NIH-funded research. Twenty years after this act, the proportion of minority patients enrolled in cancer clinical trials remains persistently low. Clinical trials are vehicles for the development and evaluation of therapeutic and preventive agents under scientifically rigorous conditions. Without representation in trials, it is projected that disparities in the cancer burden for minorities will increase. METHODS: For this review article, the authors counted the frequency with which minorities were the primary focus of National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trials, examined citations from the PubMed database focusing on the search terms "NIH Revitalization Act of 1993" and "enhancing minority accrual to cancer clinical trials," and supplemented the review with their expertise in NIH-funded research related to minority accrual in cancer clinical trials. RESULTS: The reporting and analyses of data based on minorities in clinical trials remain inadequate. Less than 2% of the National Cancer Institute's clinical trials focus on any racial/minority population as their primary emphasis. The current review of the literature indicated that the percentage of authors who reported their study sample by race/ethnicity ranged from 1.5% to 58%, and only 20% of the randomized controlled studies published in a high-impact oncology journal reported analyzing results by race/ethnicity. Proportionately greater population increases in minorities, accompanied by their persistent and disproportionate cancer burden, reinforce the need for their greater representation in clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Renewing the emphasis for minority participation in clinical trials is warranted. Policy changes are recommended.

Perspectives on barriers and facilitators to minority recruitment for clinical trials among cancer center leaders, investigators, research staff, and referring clinicians: enhancing minority participation in clinical trials (EMPaCT).

BACKGROUND: The study of disparities in minority recruitment to cancer clinical trials has focused primarily on inquiries among minority populations. Yet very little is known about the perceptions of individuals actively involved in minority recruitment to clinical trials within cancer centers. Therefore, the authors assessed the perspectives of cancer center clinical and research personnel on barriers and facilitators to minority recruitment. METHODS: In total, 91 qualitative interviews were conducted at 5 US cancer centers among 4 stakeholder groups: cancer center leaders, principal investigators, research staff, and referring clinicians. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. Qualitative analyses of response data was focused on identifying prominent themes related to barriers and facilitators to minority recruitment. RESULTS: The perspectives of the 4 stakeholder groups were largely overlapping with some variations based on their unique roles in minority recruitment. Four prominent themes were identified: 1) racial and ethnic minorities are influenced by varying degrees of skepticism related to trial participation, 2) potential minority participants often face multilevel barriers that preclude them from being offered an opportunity to participate in a clinical trial, 3) facilitators at both the institutional and participant level potentially encourage minority recruitment, and 4) variation between internal and external trial referral procedures may limit clinical trial opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities. CONCLUSIONS: Multilevel approaches are needed to address barriers and optimize facilitators within cancer centers to enhance minority recruitment for cancer clinical trials.

Provider and patient expectations for dietary supplement discussions.

BACKGROUND: Dietary supplement use in the United States is common. Patients can procure supplements without a prescription, and often do not disclose supplement use to their healthcare providers. Providers and patients may be uncertain about what would be appropriate or helpful in discussions of supplements during routine office visits. OBJECTIVE: To explore provider and patient expectations for discussions of dietary supplements. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of healthcare providers from three specialties and their patients who reported taking supplements. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five outpatient providers (14 primary care, six integrative medicine, and 15 complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers) and 107 of their patients. APPROACH: Qualitative analysis of transcripts using grounded theory and iterative review. RESULTS: Both providers and patients raised twelve common topics about dietary supplements that they felt were important to discuss during office visits, such as: supplements taken; supplement risks (interactions, safety/harm, side effects/adverse events); treatment benefits; efficacy; alternative treatments; and patient expectations/preferences for treatment. Some topics were mentioned more frequently by providers than patients, such as how to take, reason for taking, and evidence for use. Providers raised several topics that were mentioned infrequently by patients. Supplement costs and regulations were not brought up by any patients, even though consideration of these topics could influence patient decisions to take supplements. Complementary healthcare providers brought up topics not mentioned by primary care providers, such as the importance of supplement brands and supplement mega-dosing. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers have concordant views about the need to discuss patient supplement use and ensure patient safety. Patients may undervalue, be unaware of, or discount information about cost or regulations that could affect their decision-making about supplement use. Future studies could examine the value, acceptability, and influence of a more comprehensive approach to discussions to help patients appropriately evaluate supplements.

Intervention to enhance communication about newly prescribed medications.

PURPOSE: Physicians prescribing new medications often do not convey important medication-related information. This study tests an intervention to improve physician-patient communication about newly prescribed medications. METHODS: We conducted a controlled clinical trial of patients in 3 primary care practices, combining data from patient surveys with audio-recorded physician-patient interactions. The intervention consisted of a 1-hour physician-targeted interactive educational session encouraging communication about 5 basic elements regarding a new prescription and a patient information handout listing the 5 basic elements. Main outcome measures were the Medication Communication Index (MCI), a 5-point index assessed by qualitative analysis of audio-recorded interactions (giving points for discussion of medication name, purpose, directions for use, duration of use, and side effects), and patient ratings of physician communication about new prescriptions. RESULTS: Twenty-seven physicians prescribed 113 new medications to 82 of 256 patients. The mean MCI for medications prescribed by physicians in the intervention group was 3.95 (SD = 1.02), significantly higher than that for medications prescribed by control group physicians (2.86, SD = 1.23, P <.001). This effect held regardless of medication type (chronic vs nonchronic medication). Counseling about 3 of the 5 MCI components was significantly higher for medications prescribed by physicians in the intervention group, as were patients' ratings of new medication information transfer (P = .02). Independent of intervention or control groups, higher MCI scores were associated with better patient ratings about information about new prescriptions (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: A physician-targeted educational session improved the content of and enhanced patient ratings of physician communication about new medication prescriptions. Further work is required to assess whether improved communication stimulated by the intervention translates into better clinical outcomes.

Anticoagulation education: do patients understand potential medication-related emergencies?

BACKGROUND: The Joint Commission Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) National Hospital Inpatient Quality Measure VTE-5 outlines four criteria for discharge patient education when starting anticoagulation (usually, warfarin) therapy. The criteria do not specify content regarding patient recognition of potentially dangerous warfarin-related scenarios. A study was conducted to investigate how well patients assess the risks and consequences of potential warfarin-related safety threats. METHODS: From an adult population on long-term warfarin, 480 patients were randomly selected for a telephone-based survey. Warfarin-knowledge questions were drawn from a previous survey; warfarin-associated risk scenarios were developed via focus interviews. Expert anticoagulation pharmacists categorized each scenario as urgent, moderately urgent, or not urgent, as did survey participants. RESULTS: For the 184 patients (38% completion rate), the mean knowledge score was 69% (standard deviation [SD], 0.20). Overall classification accuracy of situational urgency was 59% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57.3%-60.3%). Respondents overestimated non-urgent-severity situations 23% of the time (95% CI, 20.8%-24.7%), while underestimating urgent-severity situations 21% of the time (95% CI, 19.0%-23.9%). A significant percentage of patients failed to recognize the urgency of stroke symptoms (for example, loss of vision), the risk of bleeding after incidental head trauma, or medication mismanagement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite fair factual warfarin knowledge, participants did not appear to recognize well the clinical severity of warfarin-associated scenarios. Warfarin education programs should incorporate patient-centered strategies to teach recognition of high-risk situations that compromise patient safety.

Attributes of residents as teachers and role models - a mixed methods study of stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: Residents are at the forefront of student education in the hospital, yet valid tools to assess their performance as teachers are lacking. AIMS: To develop a valid evaluation tool for assessing resident performance as educators for clerkship students. METHOD: A mixed-methods design was used. Focus groups of residents and medical students explored desired behaviors in resident educators. Using grounded theory, a list of behaviors was generated inductively through iterative review and categorized into themes. After thematic saturation, behaviors were rated on a Likert scale by stakeholders based on "importance" and "accuracy of measurement." Items which were both important and accurate were used in the final tool. RESULTS: Eighty-five desirable behaviors for resident educators were identified and consolidated into a 14-item tool. Twenty met both "importance" and "accuracy" criteria and fell under themes of respect, safe environment, balancing supervision with autonomy, relevant teaching and feedback. Nineteen "important" behaviors deemed not accurately measurable fell under themes of professionalism, communication, management skills and leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of residents as teachers and development of resident-as-teacher curricula should emphasize aforementioned areas. Professionalism and organizational skills may not be measurable reliably by learners. Complementary tools to assess these aspects of resident performance are necessary.

Patient engagement programs for recognition and initial treatment of depression in primary care: a randomized trial.

IMPORTANCE: Encouraging primary care patients to address depression symptoms and care with clinicians could improve outcomes but may also result in unnecessary treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a depression engagement video (DEV) or a tailored interactive multimedia computer program (IMCP) improves initial depression care compared with a control without increasing unnecessary antidepressant prescribing. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trial comparing DEV, IMCP, and control among 925 adult patients treated by 135 primary care clinicians (603 patients with depression and 322 patients without depression, defined by Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] score) conducted from June 2010 through March 2012 at 7 primary care clinical sites in California. INTERVENTIONS: DEV targeted to sex and income, an IMCP tailored to individual patient characteristics, and a sleep hygiene video (control). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Among depressed patients, superiority assessment of the composite measure of patient-reported antidepressant drug recommendation, mental health referral, or both (primary outcome); depression at 12-week follow-up, measured by the PHQ-8 (secondary outcome). Among nondepressed patients, noninferiority assessment of clinician- and patient-reported antidepressant drug recommendation (primary outcomes) with a noninferiority margin of 3.5%. Analyses were cluster adjusted. RESULTS: Of the 925 eligible patients, 867 were included in the primary analysis (depressed, 559; nondepressed, 308). Among depressed patients, rates of achieving the primary outcome were 17.5% for DEV, 26% for IMCP, and 16.3% for control (DEV vs control, 1.1 [95% CI, -6.7 to 8.9], P = .79; IMCP vs control, 9.9 [95% CI, 1.6 to 18.2], P = .02). There were no effects on PHQ-8 measured depression score at the 12-week follow-up: DEV vs control, -0.2 (95% CI, -1.2 to 0.8); IMCP vs control, 0.9 (95% CI, -0.1 to 1.9). Among nondepressed patients, clinician-reported antidepressant prescribing in the DEV and IMCP groups was noninferior to control (mean percentage point difference [PPD]: DEV vs control, -2.2 [90% CI, -8.0 to 3.49], P = .0499 for noninferiority; IMCP vs control, -3.3 [90% CI, -9.1 to 2.4], P = .02 for noninferiority); patient-reported antidepressant recommendation did not achieve noninferiority (mean PPD: DEV vs control, 0.9 [90% CI, -4.9 to 6.7], P = .23 for noninferiority; IMCP vs control, 0.3 [90% CI, -5.1 to 5.7], P = .16 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A tailored IMCP increased clinician recommendations for antidepressant drugs, a mental health referral, or both among depressed patients but had no effect on mental health at the 12-week follow-up. The possibility that the IMCP and DEV increased patient-reported clinician recommendations for an antidepressant drug among nondepressed patients could not be excluded. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01144104.

Feeling labeled, judged, lectured, and rejected by family and friends over depression: cautionary results for primary care clinicians from a multi-centered, qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Family and friends may help patients seek out and engage in depression care. However, patients' social networks can also undermine depression treatment and recovery. In an effort to improve depression care in primary care settings, we sought to identify, categorize, and alert primary care clinicians to depression-related messages that patients hear from friends and family that patients perceive as unhelpful or detrimental. METHODS: We conducted 15 focus groups in 3 cities. Participants (n = 116) with a personal history or knowledge of depression responded to open-ended questions about depression, including self-perceived barriers to care-seeking. Focus group conversations were audio-recorded and analyzed using iterative qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Four themes emerged related to negatively-received depression messages delivered by family and friends. Specifically, participants perceived these messages as making them feel labeled, judged, lectured to, and rejected by family and friends when discussing depression. Some participants also expressed their interpretation of their families' motivations for delivering the messages and described how hearing these messages affected depression care. CONCLUSIONS: The richness of our results reflects the complexity of communication within depression sufferers' social networks around this stigmatized issue. To leverage patients' social support networks effectively in depression care, primary care clinicians should be aware of both the potentially beneficial and detrimental aspects of social support. Specifically, clinicians should consider using open-ended queries into patients' experiences with discussing depression with family and friends as an initial step in the process. An open-ended approach may avoid future emotional trauma or stigmatization and assist patients in overcoming self-imposed barriers to depression discussion, symptom disclosure, treatment adherence and follow-up care.

"I didn't know what was wrong:" how people with undiagnosed depression recognize, name and explain their distress.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic and treatment delay in depression are due to physician and patient factors. Patients vary in awareness of their depressive symptoms and ability to bring depression-related concerns to medical attention. OBJECTIVE: To inform interventions to improve recognition and management of depression in primary care by understanding patients' inner experiences prior to and during the process of seeking treatment. DESIGN: Focus groups, analyzed qualitatively. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and sixteen adults (79% response) with personal or vicarious history of depression in Rochester NY, Austin TX and Sacramento CA. Neighborhood recruitment strategies achieved sociodemographic diversity. APPROACH: Open-ended questions developed by a multidisciplinary team and refined in three pilot focus groups explored participants' "lived experiences" of depression, depression-related beliefs, influences of significant others, and facilitators and barriers to care-seeking. Then, 12 focus groups stratified by gender and income were conducted, audio-recorded, and analyzed qualitatively using coding/editing methods. MAIN RESULTS: Participants described three stages leading to engaging in care for depression - "knowing" (recognizing that something was wrong), "naming" (finding words to describe their distress) and "explaining" (seeking meaningful attributions). "Knowing" is influenced by patient personality and social attitudes. "Naming" is affected by incongruity between the personal experience of depression and its narrow clinical conceptualizations, colloquial use of the word depression, and stigma. "Explaining" is influenced by the media, socialization processes and social relations. Physical/medical explanations can appear to facilitate care-seeking, but may also have detrimental consequences. Other explanations (characterological, situational) are common, and can serve to either enhance or reduce blame of oneself or others. CONCLUSIONS: To improve recognition of depression, primary care physicians should be alert to patients' ill-defined distress and heterogeneous symptoms, help patients name their distress, and promote explanations that comport with patients' lived experience, reduce blame and stigma, and facilitate care-seeking.

How do physicians conduct medication reviews?

BACKGROUND: Medication reviews are recommended annually for older patients. A medication review is a discussion of a patient's complete set of medications, but the actual content of a review is not well specified. The medical literature suggests that it is an exhaustive evaluation, but what physicians actually ask about their patients' medication regimens has been little studied. OBJECTIVE: To describe what physicians do when they review medications in the office setting. METHODS: Qualitative content analysis of audio-taped encounters between 100 patients aged 65 and older and 28 primary care physicians in two health care systems in Sacramento, California. RESULTS: Physicians use a combination of non-mutually exclusive strategies when reviewing chronic medications that include: (1) efforts to obtain a complete list of patient medications (36% of visits), (2) discussion of a topic related to the management of each of a patient's chronic medications (47% of visits), and (3) sequential discussion of the majority of a patient's medications without intervening discussion (45% of visits). Of 10 medication management topics that were discussed in medication reviews, a mean of 1.5 topics (SD = 1.7, range 0-7) were mentioned for each medication, with efficacy and directions being most common. Physicians conducted a sequential discussion that included discussion of each of a patient's medications in only 32% of visits. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive discussions about chronic medications are uncommon in routine practice. Practical conceptualization of what constitutes a physician-conducted medication review is needed.

Burnout assessment in house officers: evaluation of an intervention to reduce stress.

BACKGROUND: Medical house officers are at increased risk for stress related symptoms leading to professional burnout. AIMS: Measure burnout in house officers and establish whether utilization of a psychotherapeutic tool individually by physicians reduces symptoms characteristic of burnout. METHOD: Two groups of pediatric house officers at the University of California Davis Health System completed a Maslach Burnout Survey (MBS) at the beginning and end of a three-month period in 2003. An Intervention group (7 of 15 enrolled) was trained in the use of a self-administered psychotherapeutic tool. Outcome Measures were MBS scores and a qualitative interview of intervention group members. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups, prior to the study or over time. Qualitative interviews revealed that subjects experience stressors in relation to their professional activities, but already utilize some elements of the tool and were too busy to implement the entire tool systematically. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric trainees did not seem to manifest burnout symptoms based upon the MBS; interviews suggested that some do experience significant stress, although manifestations and responses were varied, some may be at risk. Methods identifying individuals at risk for burnout, and interventions to cope with stress may be valuable to their training.