Statin Use in Older Adults for Primary Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Across a Spectrum of Cardiovascular Risk.

BACKGROUND: There remains uncertainty regarding optimal primary atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevention practices for older adults. OBJECTIVE: To assess statin treatment patterns and incident ASCVD among older patients for primary prevention across the spectrum of ASCVD risk. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of participants without ASCVD aged 65-79 years. Patients were stratified by age (65-69, 70-75, > 75 years) and 10-year ASCVD risk category (low/borderline, intermediate, high) based on the Pooled Cohort Equations. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify predictors of moderate- or high-intensity statin prescriptions. Cox proportional models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for incident ASCVD. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 65-79 years without ASCVD from a Northern California health system. MAIN MEASURES: Statin prescriptions and incident ASCVD events. KEY RESULTS: There were 54,066 patients, with 10,288 (19%) aged > 75 years and 57% women. Compared with younger groups, adults > 75 years were less likely to be prescribed moderate- or high-intensity statin prescriptions across ASCVD risk groups (all p < 0.001); this persisted after multivariable adjustment including for ASCVD risk (odds ratio [OR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.86). Adults > 75 years were more likely to experience incident ASCVD (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.23-1.63). Women (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.89) and underweight older adults (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.33-0.61) were also less likely to receive moderate- or high-intensity statins. CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults aged 65-79 years without prior ASCVD, those > 75 years of age were less likely to receive moderate- or high-intensity statins regardless of ASCVD risk compared with their younger counterparts, while experiencing more incident ASCVD. Efforts are warranted to study the reasons for age-based differences in statin use in older adults, particularly those at highest ASCVD risk.

Management of Hypothyroidism in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Background and Objectives: Thyroid hormones (TH) affect cardiac function through effects on cardiac contractility and systemic vascular resistance. While TH replacement for patients with hypothyroidism might be necessary for restoration of cardiac output after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), it could theoretically lead to excessively rapid restoration of the metabolic rate. The appropriate management of hypothyroidism in patients with AMI is unknown. We describe the practice patterns in the management of hypothyroidism in the setting of AMI as well as patients' clinical outcomes. Material and Methods: Retrospective study of patients that were admitted to a tertiary care hospital with AMI and newly diagnosed or uncontrolled hypothyroidism (TSH ≥ 10 mIU/L) between 2011-2018. Eligible patients were identified using diagnosis codes for AMI and laboratory values, followed by medical record review. We categorized patients according to treatment status with TH and by degree of hypothyroidism. Clinical outcomes included: 30-day mortality/readmission, bleeding, stroke, arrhythmia, sudden cardiac death, and new or worsening heart failure. Summary statistics and group comparisons are presented. Results: Sixty-four patients were included, their median age was 64 years and 61% (n = 39) were women. Most of the patients (59%) had a documented history of hypothyroidism. Of these, all were restarted on levothyroxine (LT4) during the index admission when compared to patients without a history of hypothyroidism, of which 54% received LT4 treatment (p = 0.001). The median TSH in those treated with LT4 was higher (25 mIU/L) when compared to those who were not (12 mIU/L), (p = 0.007). Patients who received intravenous LT4 had higher TSH levels and other variables suggesting worse clinical presentation, but these differences were not statistically significant. No statistically significant differences were noted on clinical outcomes according to LT4 treatment status. Conclusion: A history of hypothyroidism and the degree of TSH elevation seem to guide the management of hypothyroidism in patients with AMI. The clinical effect of correcting hypothyroidism in this setting requires further evaluation.

Comparison of audio vs. audio + video for the rating of shared decision making in oncology using the observer OPTION5 instrument: an exploratory analysis.

BACKGROUND: How non-verbal data may influence observer-administered ratings of shared decision making is unknown. Our objective for this exploratory analysis was to determine the effect of mode of data collection (audio+video vs. audio only) on the scoring of the OPTION5 instrument, an observer rated measure of shared decision making. METHODS: We analyzed recordings of 15 encounters between cancer patients and clinicians in which a clinical decision was made. Audio+video or audio only recordings of the encounters were randomly assigned to four trained raters, who reviewed them independently. We compared the adjusted mean scores of audio+video and audio only. RESULTS: Forty-one unique decisions were identified within the 15 encounters. The mean OPTION5 score for audio+video was 17.5 (95% CI 13.5, 21.6) and for audio only was 21.8 (95% CI 17.2, 26.4) with a mean difference of 4.28 (95% CI = 0.36, 8.21; p = 0.032). CONCLUSION: A rigorous and well established measure of shared decision making performs differently when the data source is audio only. Data source may influence rating of observer administered measures of shared decision making. This potential bias needs to be confirmed as video recording to examine communication behaviors becomes more common.

Assessing the Burden of Treatment.

Current healthcare systems and guidelines are not designed to adapt to care for the large and growing number of patients with complex care needs and those with multimorbidity. Minimally disruptive medicine (MDM) is an approach to providing care for complex patients that advances patients' goals in health and life while minimizing the burden of treatment. Measures of treatment burden assess the impact of healthcare workload on patient function and well-being. At least two of these measures are now available for use with patients living with chronic conditions. Here, we describe these measures and how they can be useful for clinicians, researchers, managers, and policymakers. Their work to improve the care of high-cost, high-use, complex patients using innovative patient-centered models such as MDM should be supported by periodic large-scale assessments of treatment burden.

Minimally Disruptive Medicine for Patients with Diabetes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Patients with diabetes must deal with the burden of symptoms and complications (burden of illness). Simultaneously, diabetes care demands practical and emotional work from patients and their families, work to access and use healthcare and to enact self-care (burden of treatment). Patient work must compete with the demands of family, job, and community life. Overwhelmed patients may not have the capacity to access care or enact self-care and will thus experience suboptimal diabetes outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Minimally disruptive medicine (MDM) is a patient-centered approach to healthcare that prioritizes patients' goals for life and health while minimizing the healthcare disruption on patients' lives. In patients with diabetes, particularly in those with complex lives and multimorbidity, MDM coordinates healthcare and community responses to improve outcomes, reduce treatment burden, and enable patients to pursue their life's hopes and dreams.

[Shared decision making in patients with diabetes mellitus]. / Toma de decisiones compartidas en la atención de pacientes con diabetes mellitus: un desafío para Latinoamérica.

Patients with diabetes mellitus often have several medical problems and carry a burden imposed by their illness and treatment. Health care often ignores the values, preferences and context of patients, leading to treatments that do not fit into patients’ overwhelmed lives. Shared Decision Making (SDM) emerges as a way to answer the question: “What’s best for the patient?”. SDM promotes an empathic conversation between patients and clinicians that integrates the best evidence available with their values, preferences and context. We discuss three SDM approaches for patients with diabetes: one focused on sharing information, another on making choices, and a third one on helping patients and clinicians to talk about how to address the problems of living with diabetes and its comorbidities. Despite the benefits demonstrated in studies conducted in the U.S. and Europe, the implementation of SDM continues to be a challenge. In Latin America, healthcare and socio-economic conditions render the implementation of SDM more challenging. Research aimed to respond to this challenge is necessary. Meanwhile, clinicians can practice SDM by sharing evidence-based information, giving voice to patients’ values and preferences in making choices, and creating empathic conversations aimed at decisions aligned with patients’ context, dreams, goals, and life expectations.

The impact of health and wellness coaching on patient-important outcomes in chronic illness care: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Health and Wellness Coaching (HWC) may be beneficial in chronic condition care. We sought to appraise its effectiveness on quality of life (QoL), self-efficacy (SE), depression, and anxiety. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized trials published January 2005 - March 2023 that compared HWC to standard clinical care or another intervention without coaching. We examined QoL, SE, depression, or anxiety outcomes. Meta-analysis utilizing the random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: Thirty included studies demonstrated that HWC improved QoL within 3 months (SMD 0.62 95 % CI 0.22-1.02, p = 0.002), SE within 1.5 months (SMD 0.38, 95 % CI 0.03-0.73, p = 0.03), and depression at 3, 6, and 12 months (SMD 0.67, 95 % CI 0.13-1.20, p = 0.01), (SMD 0.72, 95 % CI 0.19-1.24, p = 0.006), and (SMD 0.41, 95 % CI 0.09-0.73, p = 0.01) Certainty in the evidence for most outcomes was either very low or low primarily due to the high risk of bias, heterogeneity, and imprecision. CONCLUSION: HWC improves QoL, SE, and depression across chronic illness populations. Future research needs to standardize intervention reporting and outcome collection. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Future HWC studies should standardize intervention components, reporting, and outcome measures, apply relevant chronic illness theories, and aim to follow participants for greater than one year.

Encounter-based randomization did not result in contamination in a shared decision-making trial: a secondary analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the level of contamination in an encounter-randomized trial evaluating a shared decision-making (SDM) tool. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We assessed contamination at three levels: (1) tool contamination (whether the tool was physically present in the usual care encounter), (2) functional contamination (whether components of the SDM tool were recreated in the usual care encounters without directly accessing the tool), and (3) learned contamination (whether clinicians "got better at SDM" in the usual care encounters as assessed by the OPTION-12 score). For functional and learned contamination, the interaction with the number of exposures to the tool was assessed. RESULTS: We recorded and analyzed 830 of 922 randomized encounters. Of the 411 recorded encounters randomized to usual care, the SDM tool was used in nine (2.2%) encounters. Clinicians discussed at least one patient-important issue in 377 usual care encounters (92%) and the risk of stroke in 214 encounters (52%). We found no significant interaction between number of times the SDM tool was used and subsequent functional or learned contamination. CONCLUSION: Despite randomly assigning clinicians to use an SDM tool in some and not other encounters, we found no evidence of contamination in usual care encounters.

Canagliflozin and cardiovascular outcomes in Type 2 diabetes.

SGLT2 inhibitors have risen to prominence in recent years as Type 2 diabetes mellitus medications with favorable effects on cardiovascular (CV) and renal outcomes. Canagliflozin is a US FDA-approved SGLT2 inhibitor that has demonstrated CV and renal outcome benefits in large scale placebo-controlled randomized trials of patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and elevated CV risk. Canagliflozin use may also be associated with serious and nonserious adverse effects requiring ongoing monitoring in patients initiated on this medication. This paper provides a detailed overview of canagliflozin including its pharmacologic profile, clinical efficacy and safety data, with discussion of both clinical trial results, as well as real-world evidence.

The Hispanic paradox in the prevalence of obesity at the county-level.

OBJECTIVE: The percentage of Hispanics in a county has a negative association with prevalence of obesity. Because Hispanic individuals are unevenly distributed in the United States, this study examined whether this protective association persists when stratifying counties into quartiles based on the size of the Hispanic population and after adjusting for county-level demographic, socioeconomic, healthcare, and environmental factors. METHODS: Data were extracted from the 2018 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation County Health Rankings. Counties were categorized into quartiles based on their percentage of Hispanics, 0%-5% (n = 1794), 5%-20% (n = 962), 20%-50% (n = 283), and >50% (n = 99). For each quartile, univariate and multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the association between prevalence of obesity and demographic, socioeconomic, healthcare, and environmental factors. RESULTS: Counties with the top quartile of Hispanic individuals had the lowest prevalence of obesity compared to counties at the bottom quartile (28.4 ± 3.6% vs. 32.7 ± 4.0%). There was a negative association between county-level percentage of Hispanics and prevalence of obesity in unadjusted analyses that persisted after adjusting for all county-level factors. CONCLUSIONS: Counties with a higher percentage of Hispanics have lower levels of obesity, even after controlling for demographic, socioeconomic, healthcare, and environmental factors. More research is needed to elucidate why having more Hispanics in a county may be protective against county-level obesity.

Statin Use in Older Adults with Stable Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Older adults (>75 years of age) represent two-thirds of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) deaths. The 2013 and 2018 American multi-society cholesterol guidelines recommend using at least moderate intensity statins for older adults with ASCVD. We examined annual trends and statin prescribing patterns in a multiethnic population of older adults with ASCVD. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal study using electronic health record (EHR) data from 2007 to 2018. SETTING: A large multi-specialty health system in Northern California. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 24,651 adults older than 75 years with ASCVD. MEASUREMENTS: Statin prescriptions for older adults with known ASCVD were trended over time. Multivariable regression models were used to identify predictors of statin prescription (logistic) after controlling for relevant demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: The study cohort included 24,651 patients older than 75 years; 48% were women. Although prescriptions for moderate/high intensity statins increased over time for adults over 75, fewer than half of the patients (45%) received moderate/high intensity statins in 2018. Women (odds ratio (OR) = 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.74, 0.80), patients who had heart failure (OR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.65, 0.74), those with dementia (OR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.82, 0.95) and patients who were underweight (OR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.57, 0.73) were less likely to receive moderate/high intensity statins. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing prescription rates between 2007 and 2018, guideline-recommended statins remained underused in older adults with ASCVD, with more pronounced disparities among women and those with certain comorbidities. Future studies are warranted to examine reasons for statin underuse in older adults with ASCVD.

County-Level Factors Associated With Cardiovascular Mortality by Race/Ethnicity.

Background Persistent racial/ethnic disparities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality are partially explained by healthcare access and socioeconomic, demographic, and behavioral factors. Little is known about the association between race/ethnicity-specific CVD mortality and county-level factors. Methods and Results Using 2017 county-level data, we studied the association between race/ethnicity-specific CVD age-adjusted mortality rate (AAMR) and county-level factors (demographics, census region, socioeconomics, CVD risk factors, and healthcare access). Univariate and multivariable linear regressions were used to estimate the association between these factors; R2 values were used to assess the factors that accounted for the greatest variation in CVD AAMR by race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic/Latinx individuals). There were 659 740 CVD deaths among non-Hispanic White individuals in 2698 counties; 100 475 deaths among non-Hispanic Black individuals in 717 counties; and 49 493 deaths among Hispanic/Latinx individuals across 267 counties. Non-Hispanic Black individuals had the highest mean CVD AAMR (320.04 deaths per 100 000 individuals), whereas Hispanic/Latinx individuals had the lowest (168.42 deaths per 100 000 individuals). The highest CVD AAMRs across all racial/ethnic groups were observed in the South. In unadjusted analyses, the greatest variation (R2) in CVD AAMR was explained by physical inactivity for non-Hispanic White individuals (32.3%), median household income for non-Hispanic Black individuals (24.7%), and population size for Hispanic/Latinx individuals (28.4%). In multivariable regressions using county-level factor categories, the greatest variation in CVD AAMR was explained by CVD risk factors for non-Hispanic White individuals (35.3%), socioeconomic factors for non-Hispanic Black (25.8%), and demographic factors for Hispanic/Latinx individuals (34.9%). Conclusions The associations between race/ethnicity-specific age-adjusted CVD mortality and county-level factors differ significantly. Interventions to reduce disparities may benefit from being designed accordingly.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Transthyretin Cardiac Amyloidosis.

Purpose of Review: Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is a life-threatening disease that disproportionately affects older adults and people of African descent. This review discusses current knowledge regarding racial and ethnic disparities in the diagnosis and management of ATTR-CM. Recent Findings: Historically, ATTR-CM was thought to be a rare cause of heart failure. Recent evidence has shown that ATTR-CM is more common among older adults, men, and people of African descent. In addition, significant geographic variation exists in the identification of amyloid cardiomyopathy. Despite the high burden of ATTR-CM among Black individuals, most clinical data for ATTR-CM are from North America and Europe. Moreover, only a minority of clinical trial participants thus far have been Black patients. In addition to racial differences, socioeconomic disparities may be further compounded by the potentially prohibitive cost and limited accessibility of disease-modifying ATTR therapies. Summary: ATTR-CM is an important cause of heart failure that disproportionately affects people of African descent. Efforts to promote earlier identification of ATTR-CM in general practice will likely improve clinical outcomes for all groups. Future trials should strive to enroll a higher proportion of Black patients. Furthermore, enhanced efforts are warranted to improve treatment accessibility among racial and ethnic minority groups that may be more likely to be affected by ATTR-CM.

Patient Work and Treatment Burden in Type 2 Diabetes: A Mixed-Methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: To use quantitative and qualitative methods to characterize the work patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) enact and explore the interactions between illness, treatment, and life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this mixed-methods, descriptive study, adult patients with T2DM seen at the outpatient diabetes clinic at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from February 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017, were invited to participate. The study had 3 phases. In phase 1, the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS) scale was used to quantify treatment burden. In phase 2, a convenience sample of patients used a smartphone application to describe, in real time, time spent completing diabetes self-management tasks and to upload descriptive digital photographs. In phase 3, these data were explored in qualitative interviews that were analyed by 2 investigators using deductive analysis. RESULTS: Of 162 participants recruited, 160 returned the survey (phase 1); of the 50 participants who used the smartphone application (phase 2), we interviewed 17 (phase 3). The areas in which patients reported highest treatment burden were difficulty with negotiating health services (eg, coordinating medical appointments), medical expenses, and mental/physical exhaustion with self-care. Participants reported that medical appointments required about 2.5 hours per day, and completing administrative tasks related to health care required about 45 minutes. Time spent on health behaviors varied widely-from 2 to 60 minutes in a given 3-hour period. Patients' experience of a task's burden did not always correlate with the time spent on that task. CONCLUSION: The most burdensome tasks to patients with T2DM included negotiating health care services, affording medications, and completing administrative tasks even though they were not the most time-consuming activities. To be minimally disruptive, diabetes care should minimize the delegation of administrative tasks to patients.

Documentation of hypoglycemia assessment among adults with diabetes during clinical encounters in primary care and endocrinology practices.

PURPOSE: To examine the proportion of diabetes-focused clinical encounters in primary care and endocrinology practices where the evaluation for hypoglycemia is documented; and when it is, identify clinicians' stated actions in response to patient-reported events. METHODS: A total of 470 diabetes-focused encounters among 283 patients nonpregnant adults (≥18 years) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus in this retrospective cohort study. Participants were randomly identified in blocks of treatment strategy and care location (95 and 52 primary care encounters among hypoglycemia-prone medications (i.e. insulin, sulfonylurea) and others patients, respectively; 94 and 42 endocrinology encounters among hypo-treated and others, respectively). Documentation of hypoglycemia and subsequent management plan in the electronic health record were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 132 (46.6%) patients had documentation of hypoglycemia assessment, significantly more prevalent among hypo-treated patients seen in endocrinology than in primary care (72.3% vs. 47.4%; P = 0.001). Hypoglycemia was identified by patient in 38.2% of encounters. Odds of hypoglycemia assessment documentation was highest among the hypo-treated (OR 13.6; 95% CI 5.5-33.74, vs. others) and patients seen in endocrine clinic (OR 4.48; 95% CI 2.3-8.6, vs. primary care). After documentation of hypoglycemia, treatment was modified in 30% primary care and 46% endocrine clinic encounters; P = 0.31. Few patients were referred to diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES). CONCLUSIONS: Continued efforts to improve hypoglycemia evaluation, documentation, and management are needed, particularly in primary care. This includes not only screening at-risk patients for hypoglycemia, but also modifying their treatment regimens and/or leveraging DSMES.

Multimethod, multidataset analysis reveals paradoxical relationships between sociodemographic factors, Hispanic ethnicity and diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Population-level and individual-level analyses have strengths and limitations as do 'blackbox' machine learning (ML) and traditional, interpretable models. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality with complex sociodemographic dynamics that have not been analyzed in a way that leverages population-level and individual-level data as well as traditional epidemiological and ML models. We analyzed complementary individual-level and county-level datasets with both regression and ML methods to study the association between sociodemographic factors and DM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: County-level DM prevalence, demographics, and socioeconomic status (SES) factors were extracted from the 2018 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation County Health Rankings and merged with US Census data. Analogous individual-level data were extracted from 2007 to 2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey studies and corrected for oversampling with survey weights. We used multivariate linear (logistic) regression and ML regression (classification) models for county (individual) data. Regression and ML models were compared using measures of explained variation (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and R2). RESULTS: Among the 3138 counties assessed, the mean DM prevalence was 11.4% (range: 3.0%-21.1%). Among the 12 824 individuals assessed, 1688 met DM criteria (13.2% unweighted; 10.2% weighted). Age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, and education were associated with DM at the county and individual levels. Higher county Hispanic ethnic density was negatively associated with county DM prevalence, while Hispanic ethnicity was positively associated with individual DM. ML outperformed regression in both datasets (mean R2 of 0.679 vs 0.610, respectively (p<0.001) for county-level data; mean AUC of 0.737 vs 0.727 (p<0.0427) for individual-level data). CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic individuals are at higher risk of DM, while counties with larger Hispanic populations have lower DM prevalence. Analyses of population-level and individual-level data with multiple methods may afford more confidence in results and identify areas for further study.

Normalization of a conversation tool to promote shared decision making about anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation within a practical randomized trial of its effectiveness: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) implementation remains challenging. The factors that promote or hinder implementation of SDM tools for use during the consultation, including contextual factors such as clinician burnout and organizational support, remain unclear. We explored these factors in the context of a practical multicenter randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of an SDM conversation tool for patients with atrial fibrillation considering anticoagulation therapy. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we recruited clinicians who were regularly involved in conversations with patients regarding anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. Clinicians reported their characteristics and burnout symptoms using the two-item Maslach Burnout Inventory. Clinicians were trained in using the SDM tool, and they recorded their perceptions of the tool's normalization potential using the Normalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) survey instrument and verbally reflected on their answers to these survey questions. When possible, the training sessions and clinicians' verbal responses to the conversation tool were recorded. RESULTS: Our study comprised 183 clinicians recruited into the trial (168 with survey responses and 112 with recordings). Overall, clinicians gave high scores to the normalization potential of the intervention; they endorsed all domains of normalization to the same extent, regardless of site, clinician characteristics, or burnout ratings. In interviews, clinicians paid significant attention to making sense of the tool. Tool buy-in seemed to depend heavily on their ability to see the tool as accurate and "evidence-based" and their perceptions of having time in the consultation to use it. CONCLUSIONS: While time in the consultation remains a barrier, we did not find a significant association between burnout symptoms and normalization of an SDM conversation tool. Possible areas for improving the normalization of SDM conversation tools in clinical practice include enabling collaboration among clinicians to implement the tool and reporting how clinicians elsewhere use the tool. Direct measures of normalization (i.e., observing how often clinicians access the tool in practice outside of the clinical trial) may further elucidate the role that contextual factors, such as clinician burnout, play in the implementation of SDM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02905032. Registered on 9 September 2016.

Humanistic communication in the evaluation of shared decision making: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which evaluations of shared decision making (SDM) assess the extent and quality of humanistic communication (i.e., respect, compassion, empathy). METHODS: We systematically searched Web of Science and Scopus for prospective studies published between 2012 and February 2018 that evaluated SDM in actual clinical decisions using validated SDM measures. Two reviewers working independently and in duplicate extracted all statements from eligible studies and all items from SDM measurement instruments that referred to humanistic patient-clinician communication. RESULTS: Of the 154 eligible studies, 14 (9%) included ≥1 statements regarding humanistic communication, either in framing the study (N = 2), measuring impact (e.g., empathy, respect, interpersonal skills; N = 9), as patients'/clinicians' accounts of SDM (N = 2), in interpreting study results (N = 3), and in discussing implications of study findings (N = 3). Of the 192 items within the 11 SDM measurement instruments deployed in the included studies, 7 (3.6%) items assessed humanistic communication. CONCLUSION: Assessments of the quality of SDM focus narrowly on SDM technique and rarely assess humanistic aspects of patient-clinician communication. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Considering SDM as merely a technique may reduce SDM's patient-centeredness and undermine its' contribution to patient care.

Impact of decision aids used during clinical encounters on clinician outcomes and consultation length: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians' satisfaction with encounter decision aids is an important component in facilitating implementation of these tools. We aimed to determine the impact of decision aids supporting shared decision making (SDM) during the clinical encounter on clinician outcomes. METHODS: We searched nine databases from inception to June 2017. Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of decision aids used during clinical encounters with an unaided control group were eligible for inclusion. Due to heterogeneity among included studies, we used a narrative evidence synthesis approach. RESULTS: Twenty-five papers met inclusion criteria including 22 RCTs and 3 qualitative or mixed-methods studies nested in an RCT, together representing 23 unique trials. These trials evaluated healthcare decisions for cardiovascular prevention and treatment (n=8), treatment of diabetes mellitus (n=3), treatment of osteoporosis (n=2), treatment of depression (n=2), antibiotics to treat acute respiratory infections (n=3), cancer prevention and treatment (n=4) and prenatal diagnosis (n=1). Clinician outcomes were measured in only a minority of studies. Clinicians' satisfaction with decision making was assessed in only 8 (and only 2 of them showed statistically significantly greater satisfaction with the decision aid); only three trials asked if clinicians would recommend the decision aid to colleagues and only five asked if clinicians would use decision aids in the future. Outpatient consultations were not prolonged when a decision aid was used in 9 out of 13 trials. The overall strength of the evidence was low, with the major risk of bias related to lack of blinding of participants and/or outcome assessors. CONCLUSION: Decision aids can improve clinicians' satisfaction with medical decision making and provide helpful information without affecting length of consultation time. Most SDM trials, however, omit outcomes related to clinicians' perspective on the decision making process or the likelihood of using a decision aid in the future.

Lipid-Lowering Agents in Older Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of lipid-lowering agents on patient-important outcomes in older individuals is unclear. METHODS: We included randomized trials that enrolled individuals aged 65 years or older and that included at least 1 year of follow-up.Pairs of reviewers selected and appraised the trials. RESULTS: We included 23 trials that enrolled 60,194 elderly patients. For primary prevention, statins reduced the risk of coronary artery disease [CAD; relative risk (RR): 0.79, 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.91] and myocardial infarction (MI; RR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.66) but not all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or stroke. These effects were imprecise in patients with diabetes, but there was no significant interaction between diabetes status and the intervention effect. For secondary prevention, statins reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.89), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.79), CAD (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.77), MI (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.79), and revascularization (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.77). Intensive (vs less-intensive) statin therapy reduced the risk of CAD and heart failure. Niacin did not reduce the risk of revascularization, and fibrates did not reduce the risk of stroke, cardiovascular mortality, or CAD. CONCLUSION: High-certainty evidence supports statin use for secondary prevention in older individuals. Evidence for primary prevention is less certain. Data in older individuals with diabetes are limited; however, no empirical evidence has shown a significant difference based on diabetes status.