Health Care Team Interventions to Reduce Distress Behaviors in Older Adults: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: This review examines health care team-focused interventions on managing persistent or recurrent distress behaviors among older adults in long-term residential or inpatient health care settings. METHODS: We searched interventions addressing health care worker (HCW) knowledge and skills related to distress behavior management using Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, and Ovid PsycINFO from December 2002 through December 2022. RESULTS: We screened 6,582 articles; 29 randomized trials met inclusion criteria. Three studies on patient-facing HCW interactions (e.g. medication management, diagnosing distress) showed mixed results on agitation; one study found no effect on quality of life. Six HCW-focused studies suggested short-term reduction in distress behaviors. Quality-of-life improvement or decreased antipsychotic use was not evidenced. Among 17 interventions combining HCW-focused and patient-facing activities, 0 showed significant distress reduction, 8 showed significant antipsychotic reduction (OR = 0.79, 95%CI [0.69, 0.91]) and 9 showed quality of life improvements (SMD = 0.71, 95%CI [0.39, 1.04]). One study evaluating HCW, patient-, and environmental-focused intervention activities showed short-term improvement in agitation. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Novel health care models combining HCW training and patient management improve patient quality of life, reduce antipsychotic use, and may reduce distress behaviors. Evaluation of intervention's effects on staff burnout and utilization is needed.

Strategies for enhancing the representation of women in clinical trials: an evidence map.

BACKGROUND: Equitable sex- and gender-based representation in clinical trials is an essential step to ensuring evidence-based care for women. While multi-institutional actions have led to significant improvements in the inclusion of women in trials, inequity persists in areas like sex-neutral cancers and cardiovascular disease. We sought to identify strategies described or evaluated to boost the inclusion of women in clinical trials. METHODS: We used evidence mapping methodology to examine the breadth of relevant literature. We developed an a priori protocol and followed reporting guidance from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis where applicable. We searched MEDLINE® (via PubMed) and EMBASE (via Elsevier) databases from inception through April 4, 2023, and used standardized procedures incorporating duplication and data verification. We included articles that described strategies to improve the recruitment and retention of women in clinical trials. RESULTS: We identified 122 articles describing recruitment and retention strategies for 136 trials (377,595 women). Only one article distinguished between the sex and gender identity of participants, and none defined their use of the terms such as "women" or "female". The majority of articles (95%) described recruitment for only women, and 64% were conducted in the USA. Ninety-two articles (75%) described strategies in the context of sex-specific conditions (e.g., gynecologic diagnosis). The majority of included articles evaluated a behavioral intervention (52%), with 23% evaluating pharmacologic interventions and 4% invasive interventions. The most common trial phase for reported strategies was during outreach to potential participants (116 articles), followed by intervention delivery (76), enrollment (40), outcomes assessment (21), analysis and interpretation (3), and dissemination (4). We describe specific types of strategies within each of these phases. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the existing literature describing strategies to improve the inclusion of women draws from trials for sex-specific conditions and is largely related to outreach to potential participants. There is little information about how and if studies have attempted to proportionally increase the inclusion of women in trials with both men and women or those focused on invasive and pharmacologic interventions. Future work in this area should focus on how to increase the participation of women in mixed-sex studies and on those areas with remaining inequities in trial participation.

Genomic classifiers and prognosis of localized prostate cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Refinement of the risk classification for localized prostate cancer is warranted to aid in clinical decision making. A systematic analysis was undertaken to evaluate the prognostic ability of three genomic classifiers, Decipher, GPS, and Prolaris, for biochemical recurrence, development of metastases and prostate cancer-specific mortality in patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were queried for reports published from January 2010 to April 2022. STUDY SELECTION: prospective or retrospective studies reporting prognosis for patients with localized prostate cancer. DATA EXTRACTION: relevant data were extracted into a customized database by one researcher with a second overreading. Risk of bias was assessed using a validated tool for prognostic studies, Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS). Disagreements were resolved by consensus or by input from a third reviewer. We assessed the certainty of evidence by GRADE incorporating adaptation for prognostic studies. RESULTS: Data synthesis: a total of 39 studies (37 retrospective) involving over 10,000 patients were identified. Twenty-two assessed Decipher, 5 GPS, and 14 Prolaris. Thirty-four studies included patients who underwent prostatectomy. Based on very low to low certainty of evidence, each of the three genomic classifiers modestly improved upon the prognostic ability for biochemical recurrence, development of metastases, and prostate cancer-specific mortality compared to standard clinical risk-classification schemes. LIMITATIONS: downgrading of confidence in the evidence stemmed largely from bias due to the retrospective nature of the studies, heterogeneity in treatment received, and era in which patients were treated (i.e., prior to the 2000s). CONCLUSIONS: Genomic classifiers provide a small but consistent improvement upon the prognostic ability of clinical classification schemes, which may be helpful when treatment decisions are uncertain. However, evidence from current management-era data and of the predictive ability of these tests is needed.

Interventions to Improve Long-Term Adherence to Physical Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of physical rehabilitation interventions, supplemented with one or more adherence-enhancing components, on outcomes among adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis or chronic lower back pain. DESIGN: Primary literature search from inception of each database to July 27, 2021, guided by relevant search terms and keywords to search titles and abstracts. All articles meeting eligibility criteria were included for data abstraction. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, and Embase. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomized and nonrandomized trials evaluating adherence-focused intervention components conducted in addition to an index usual care or usual care-like physical rehabilitation program among adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis or chronic low back pain. Eligible studies included a comparator group of the same index physical rehabilitation intervention without the adjunctive adherence components. Included studies measured outcomes at least 3 months after the rehabilitation course. RESULTS: Of the 10 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 6 interventions were delivered concurrent to an index rehabilitation program and 4 were delivered sequentially. Of the 3 studies that reported a positive effect on long-term adherence, only 1 was a low risk of bias study. There is very limited evidence of a beneficial treatment effect of adjunct adherence interventions on long-term physical function, self-efficacy, or adverse events. CONCLUSION: We found inadequate evidence evaluating adherence-enhancing interventions for the specific promotion of long-term adherence to home rehabilitation programs. Future studies should consider testing interventions specifically built to target behavioral maintenance of home rehabilitation programs.

A telehealth-delivered intervention to extend the veteran HIV treatment cascade for cardiovascular disease prevention: V-EXTRA-CVD study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Veterans living with HIV have up to twice the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to those without HIV.Objective: Our study seeks to test a non-physician led virtual self-management implementation strategy to reduce ASCVD risk among people living with HIV (PWH). We aim to conduct a randomized control trial among PWH (n = 300) with a diagnosis of hypertension (HTN) who are enrolled in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) clinics, on suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART), randomized 1:1 to intervention vs. education control for a 12-month duration.Methods: Using human centered design approach, we have adapted a previous 5-component telehealth focused, non-physician led intervention to a Veteran population. The education control arm receives enhanced education in addition to usual care. The primary outcome is 6 mmHg reduction in systolic BP over 12-month in the intervention arm compared to the control arm. The secondary outcome is a 12-month difference in non-HDL cholesterol. While each component of our intervention has an evidence base, they have not been tested together in an HIV context.Conclusion: The proposed multicomponent intervention has the potential to improve cardiovascular outcomes in PWH using novel virtual care methods in a patient centered care approach.

Optimizing the Equitable Deployment of Virtual Care for Women: Protocol for a Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Examining Patient and Provider Perspectives Supplemented with Primary Qualitative Data.

Introduction: Women experience numerous barriers to patient-centered health care (e.g., lack of continuity). Such barriers are amplified for women from marginalized communities. Virtual care may improve equitable access. We are conducting a partner-engaged, qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) of patients' and providers' experiences with virtual health care delivery for women. Methods: We use a best-fit framework approach informed by the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability framework and Public Health Critical Race Praxis. We will supplement published literature with qualitative interviews with women from underrepresented communities and their health care providers. We will engage patients and other contributors through multiple participatory methods. Results: Our search identified 5525 articles published from 2010 to 2022. Sixty were eligible, of which 42 focused on women and 24 on provider experiences. Data abstraction and analysis are ongoing. Discussion: This work offers four key innovations to advance health equity: (1) conceptual foundation rooted in an antiracist action-oriented praxis; (2) worked example of centering QES on marginalized communities; (3) supplementing QES with primary qualitative information with populations historically marginalized in the health care system; and (4) participatory approaches that foster longitudinal partnered engagement. Health Equity Implications: Our approach to exploring virtual health care for women demonstrates an antiracist praxis to inform knowledge generation. In doing so, we aim to generate findings that can guide health care systems in the equitable deployment of comprehensive virtual care for women.

Rolling out PRIDE in All Who Served: Barriers and Facilitators for Sites Implementing an LGBTQ+ Health Education Group for Military Veterans.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) PRIDE in All Who Served health education group (PRIDE) was developed to improve health equity and access to care for military veterans who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and/or other sexual/gender-diverse identities (LGBTQ+). This 10-week program rapidly spread to over 30 VHA facilities in 4 years. Veterans receiving PRIDE experience improved LGBTQ+ identity-related resilience and reductions in suicide attempt likelihood. Despite PRIDE's rapid spread across facilities, information is lacking on implementation determinants. The current study's goal was to clarify determinants of PRIDE group implementation and sustainment. METHODS: A purposive sample of VHA staff (N = 19) with experience delivering or implementing PRIDE completed teleconference interviews January-April 2021. The interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Rapid qualitative matrix analysis was completed with methods to ensure rigor (e.g., triangulation and investigator reflexivity). RESULTS: Key barriers and facilitators of PRIDE implementation were heavily related to facility inner setting (what is happening inside the facility), including implementation readiness (e.g., leadership support for LGBTQ+-affirming programming, access to LGBTQ+-affirming care training) and facility culture (e.g., systemic anti-LGBTQ+ stigma). Several implementation process facilitators enhanced engagement at sites, such as a centrally facilitated PRIDE learning collaborative and a formal process of contracting/training for new PRIDE sites. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Although aspects of the outer setting and larger societal influences were mentioned, the majority of factors impacting implementation success were at the VHA facility level and therefore may be more readily addressable through tailored implementation support. The importance of LGBTQ+ equity at the facility level indicates that implementation facilitation should ideally address institutional equity in addition to implementation logistics. Combining effective interventions with attention to local implementation needs will be required before LGBTQ+ veterans in all areas will benefit from PRIDE and other health equity-focused interventions.

Team-Based Qualitative Rapid Analysis: Approach and Considerations for Conducting Developmental Formative Evaluation for Intervention Design.

Qualitative rapid analysis is one of many rapid research approaches that offer a solution to the problem of time constrained health services evaluations and avoids sacrificing the richness of qualitative data that is needed for intervention design. We describe modifications to an established team-based, rapid analysis approach that we used to rapidly collect and analyze semi-structured interview data for a developmental formative evaluation of a cardiovascular disease prevention intervention. Over 18 weeks, we conducted and analyzed 35 semi-structured interviews that were conducted with patients and health care providers in the Veterans Health Administration to identify targets for adapting the intervention in preparation for a clinical trial. We identified 12 key themes describing actionable targets for intervention modification. We highlight important methodological decisions that allowed us to maintain rigor when using qualitative rapid analysis for intervention adaptation and we provide practical guidance on the resources needed to execute similar qualitative studies. We additionally reflect on the benefits and challenges of the described approach when working within a remote research team environment.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04545489.

Frontline Clinician Appraisement of Research Engagement: "I feel out of touch with research".

BACKGROUND: Health services research can benefit from frontline clinician input across all stages of research, yet their key perspectives are often not meaningfully engaged. OBJECTIVE: How can we improve clinician engagement in research? DESIGN: Convenience sampling and semi-structured interviews followed by descriptive content analysis with an inductive approach, followed by group participatory listening sessions with interviewees to further contextualize findings. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one multidisciplinary clinicians from one healthcare system. KEY RESULTS: We identified two major themes: perceptions of research (how research fits within job role) and characterizing effective engagement (what works and what does not work in frontline clinician engagement). "Perceptions of Research" encompassed three subthemes: prior research experience; desired degree of engagement; and benefits to clinicians engaging in research. "Characterizing Effective Engagement" had these subthemes: engagement barriers; engagement facilitators; and impact of clinician's racial identity. CONCLUSIONS: Investing in frontline clinicians as research collaborators is beneficial to clinicians themselves, the health systems that employ them, and those for which they care. Yet, there are multiple barriers to meaningful engagement.

Research Inclusion Across the Lifespan: A Good Start, but There Is More Work to Be Done.

While older adults account for a disproportionate amount of healthcare spending, they are often underrepresented in clinical research needed to guide clinical care. The purpose of this perspective is to make readers aware of new data on age at enrollment for participants included in National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded clinical research. We highlight key findings of relevance to general internal medicine and suggest ways readers could support the inclusion of older adults in clinical research. Data from the NIH Research Inclusion Statistics Report show that there were 881,385 participants enrolled in all NIH-funded clinical research in 2021, of whom 170,110 (19%) were 65 years and older. However, on average, studies included a far lower percentage of older adults. Additionally, there were many conditions for which overall enrollment rates for older adults were lower than would be expected. For example, while 10% of participants in studies related to diabetes were ≥ 65 years old, older individuals represent 43% of all prevalent diabetes in the USA. Researchers should work with clinicians to advocate for older adults and ensure their participation in clinical research. Best practices and resources for overcoming common barriers to the inclusion of older adults in research could also be disseminated.

Patient Choice After Referral to Physical Therapy for Lower Back Pain and Knee Osteoarthritis.

Objective: To assess factors influencing Veterans' decisions to initiate physical therapy (PT) after referral for low back pain (LBP) or knee osteoarthritis (OA). Design: Qualitative study using individual semistructured telephone interviews. Setting: Durham Veterans Health Administration Health Care System. Participants: A total of 44 Veteran patients (N=44) aged 26-85 were referred for LBP or knee OA between January and August 2021. Results: Patient-level factors influencing PT initiation included confusion with navigating the health system, efficacy beliefs about PT, and thoughts about physical therapists' ability to diagnose their pain. At the provider level, discussion about PT care appeared to increase initiation of PT. At the system level, influences included wait times, availability of appointments outside business hours, and easy-to-access locations. Motivational themes included respondents' symptoms and functional limitations that drove them to initiate care. Respondents suggested that changes to wait times through same-day or rapid appointments, assistance and increased ease of the scheduling process, transportation support, convenient care locations, and information about PT, including its benefits, could improve PT care access. Conclusions: This study of patient perceptions of initiating PT care after referral identified tangible barriers to care at patient, provider, and system levels for respondents with LBP or knee OA. Patient knowledge and system-level barriers, including how challenging the system is to navigate, are major factors that reduce patients' use of PT after referral. Health systems and physical therapists should address barriers to care through patient education, scheduling assistance, and changes to the health care system, including options for same-day appointments.

Videoconferencing of Movement-Based and Psychologically Informed Interventions for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Horizon Scan.

Introduction: With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, use of telehealth technology increased dramatically. Nonpharmacological approaches to pain management may be well suited for virtual care. Yet, it is not widely understood if this treatment modality is effective when delivered via videoconferencing. This review examines the effectiveness of movement-based and psychologically informed chronic pain management interventions delivered via videoconferencing compared to in-person care. Methods: Searches of MEDLINE® (via Ovid®), Embase (via Elsevier), CINAHL Complete (via EBSCO), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Ovid) were performed from inception to June 10, 2021. All articles meeting eligibility criteria were included for data abstraction. Results: Eight thousand two hundred fifty-two citations were identified, and after removing duplicates, 4,661 citations remained. One study investigating acceptance and commitment therapy met eligibility criteria. The noninferiority randomized trial found no statistically significant difference in outcomes between delivery modalities. A horizon scan was conducted to assess planned or recent studies. Horizon scan results yielded six protocols in trial databases, one pilot study, and three published protocols for ongoing studies. Discussion: Findings from this study indicate that virtually delivered pain management is a possible substitute for in-person care. Given the paucity of evidence on this topic, further comparative and adequately powered studies that assess the impact of movement-based and psychologically informed pain management delivered via videoconferencing are needed. Conclusions: Research is needed to understand patient preferences of such interventions within a variety of settings. Such evaluations will be needed to guide clinical and operations practice to optimize equitable deployment and access to high-quality health care delivered via videoconferencing.

Incorporating TechQuity in Virtual Care Within the Veterans Health Administration: Identifying Future Research and Operations Priorities.

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic dramatically changed healthcare delivery, driving rapid expansion of synchronous (i.e., real-time) audio-only and video telehealth, otherwise known as virtual care. Yet evidence describes significant inequities in virtual care utilization, with certain populations more dependent on audio-only virtual care than video-based care. Research is needed to inform virtual care policies and processes to counteract current inequities in access and health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Given the importance of incorporating equity into virtual care within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), we convened a Think Tank to identify priorities for future research and virtual care operations focused on achieving equitable implementation of virtual care within the VHA. METHODS: We used participatory activities to engage clinicians, researchers, and operational partners from across the VHA to develop priorities for equitable implementation of virtual care. We refined priorities through group discussion and force-ranked prioritization and outlined next steps for selected priorities. KEY RESULTS: Think Tank participants included 43 individuals from the VHA who represented diverse geographical regions, offices, and backgrounds. Attendees self-identified their associations primarily as operations (n = 9), research (n = 28), or both (n = 6). We identified an initial list of 63 potential priorities for future research and virtual care operations. Following discussion, we narrowed the list to four priority areas: (1) measure inequities in virtual care, (2) address emerging inequities in virtual care, (3) deploy virtual care equitably to accommodate differently abled veterans, and (4) measure and address potential adverse consequences of expanded virtual care. We discuss related information, data, key partners, and outline potential next steps. CONCLUSIONS: This Think Tank of research and operational partners from across the VHA identified promising opportunities to incorporate equity into the design and implementation of virtual care. Although much work remains, the priorities identified represent important steps toward achieving this vital goal.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation and adoption of improvement coaching: A qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organisations and teams perform improvement activities to facilitate high-quality healthcare. The use of an improvement coach who provides support and guidance to the healthcare team may facilitate improvement activities; however, no systematic review exists on the facilitators and barriers to implementing an improvement coach. AIMS: We conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis to examine the facilitators and barriers to the implementation of improvement coaching. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE® , Embase and CINAHL. The final search was in March 2021. The screening eligibility criteria included the following: interdisciplinary team receiving the coaching, improvement coaching, designs with a qualitative component and primary purpose of evaluating practice facilitation in OECD countries. An ecologically-informed consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) served as the framework for coding. Patterns of barriers and facilitators across domains were identified through matrix analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using Critical Appraisal Skills Program. PRISMA reporting guidelines served as a guide for reporting this review. RESULTS: Nineteen studies with a qualitative component met the inclusion criteria. Four themes of barriers and facilitators crossed multiple CFIR domains: adaptability (e.g. making adjustments to the project; process, or approach); knowledge and skills (e.g. understanding of content and process for the project); engagement (e.g. willingness to be involved in the process) and resources (e.g. assets required to complete the improvement process). CONCLUSION: Improvement coaching is a complex intervention that influences the context, healthcare team being coached and improvement activities. Improvement coaches should understand how to minimise barriers and promote facilitators that are unique to each improvement project across the domains. Limitations of the study are related to the nature of the intervention including potential publication bias given quality improvement focus; the variety of terms similar to improvement coaching or selection of framework.

Participatory research to improve medication reconciliation for older adults in the community.

INTRODUCTION: Medication reconciliation, a technique that assists in aligning a care team's understanding of an individual's true medication regimen, is vital to optimize medication use and prevent medication errors. Historically, most medication reconciliation research has focused on institutional settings and transitional care, with comparatively little attention given to medication reconciliation in community settings. To optimize medication reconciliation for community-dwelling older adults, healthcare professionals and older adults must be engaged in co-designing processes that create sustainable approaches. METHODS: Academic researchers, older adults, and community- and health system-based healthcare professionals engaged in a participatory process to better understand medication reconciliation barriers and co-design solutions. The initiative consisted of two participatory research approaches: (1) Sparks Innovation Studios, which synthesized professional expertise and opinions, and (2) a Community Consultation Studio with older adults. Input from both groups informed a list of possible solutions and these were ranked based on evaluative criteria of feasibility, person-centeredness, equity, and sustainability. RESULTS: Sparks Innovation Studios identified a lack of ownership, fragmented healthcare systems, and time constraints as the leading barriers to medication reconciliation. The Community Consultation Studio revealed that older adults often feel dismissed in medical encounters and perceive poor communication with and among providers. The Community Consultation Studio and Sparks Innovation Studios resulted in four highly-ranked solutions to improve medication reconciliation: (1) support for older adults to improve health literacy and ownership; (2) ensuring medication indications are included on prescription labels; (3) trainings and incentives for front-line staff in clinic settings to become champions for medication reconciliation; and (4) electronic health record improvements that simplify active medication lists. CONCLUSION: Engaging community representatives with academic partners in the research process enhanced understanding of community priorities and provided a practical roadmap for innovations that have the potential to improve the well-being of community-dwelling older adults.

Implementing evidence-based telephone coaching for health behavior program enrollment: A quality improvement project.

INTRODUCTION: This program evaluation describes the use of implementation facilitation to support uptake of a telephone-based engagement coaching intervention, ACTIVATE, using paraprofessional staff, to support health behavior program enrollment. METHOD: The RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework guided the formative evaluation. A mixed-methods approach was used to integrate qualitative (i.e., rapid analysis approach) and quantitative (i.e., descriptive statistics, chi-square test of independence, logistic regression) analyses for each outcome. RESULTS: Most patients (95%; 319 of 335) were offered ACTIVATE, and 82 patients completed ACTIVATE. Delivery with paraprofessional staff was feasible with adaptations for translation from research to a clinical setting, which are described. External facilitation (a form of implementation facilitation) was associated with higher reach. DISCUSSION: Delivery of telephone-based coaching by paraprofessional staff to support health behavior program enrollment was feasible. External facilitation was important to the translation of ACTIVATE from research to clinical practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Telehealth for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Extensive literature support telehealth as a supplement or adjunct to in-person care for the management of chronic conditions such as congestive heart failure (CHF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Evidence is needed to support the use of telehealth as an equivalent and equitable replacement for in-person care and to assess potential adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to address the following question: among adults, what is the effect of synchronous telehealth (real-time response among individuals via phone or phone and video) compared with in-person care (or compared with phone, if synchronous video care) for chronic management of CHF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and T2DM on key disease-specific clinical outcomes and health care use? METHODS: We followed systematic review methodologies and searched two databases (MEDLINE and Embase). We included randomized or quasi-experimental studies that evaluated the effect of synchronously delivered telehealth for relevant chronic conditions that occurred over ≥2 encounters and in which some or all in-person care was supplanted by care delivered via phone or video. We assessed the bias using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care risk of bias (ROB) tool and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. We described the findings narratively and did not conduct meta-analysis owing to the small number of studies and the conceptual heterogeneity of the identified interventions. RESULTS: We identified 8662 studies, and 129 (1.49%) were reviewed at the full-text stage. In total, 3.9% (5/129) of the articles were retained for data extraction, all of which (5/5, 100%) were randomized controlled trials. The CHF study (1/5, 20%) was found to have high ROB and randomized patients (n=210) to receive quarterly automated asynchronous web-based review and follow-up of telemetry data versus synchronous personal follow-up (in-person vs phone-based) for 1 year. A 3-way comparison across study arms found no significant differences in clinical outcomes. Overall, 80% (4/5) of the studies (n=466) evaluated synchronous care for patients with T2DM (ROB was judged to be low for 2, 50% of studies and high for 2, 50% of studies). In total, 20% (1/5) of the studies were adequately powered to assess the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin level between groups; however, no significant difference was found. Intervention design varied greatly from remote monitoring of blood glucose combined with video versus in-person visits to an endocrinology clinic to a brief, 3-week remote intervention to stabilize uncontrolled diabetes. No articles were identified for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: This review found few studies with a variety of designs and interventions that used telehealth as a replacement for in-person care. Future research should consider including observational studies and studies on additional highly prevalent chronic diseases.

Addressing Hypertension Outcomes Using Telehealth and Population Health Managers: Adaptations and Implementation Considerations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a growing evidence base describing population health approaches to improve blood pressure control. We reviewed emerging trends in hypertension population health management and present implementation considerations from an intervention called Team-supported, Electronic health record-leveraged, Active Management (TEAM). By doing so, we highlight the role of population health managers, practitioners who use population level data and to proactively engage at-risk patients, in improving blood pressure control. RECENT FINDINGS: Within a population health paradigm, we discuss telehealth-delivered approaches to equitably improve hypertension care delivery. Additionally, we explore implementation considerations and complementary features of team-based, telehealth-delivered, population health management. By leveraging the unique role and expertise of a population health manager as core member of team-based telehealth, health systems can implement a cost-effective and scalable intervention that addresses multi-level barriers to hypertension care delivery. We describe the literature of telehealth-based population health management for patients with hypertension. Using the TEAM intervention as a case study, we then present implementation considerations and intervention adaptations to integrate a population health manager within the health care team and effectively manage hypertension for a defined patient population. We emphasize practical considerations to inform implementation, scaling, and sustainability. We highlight future research directions to advance the field and support translational efforts in diverse clinical and community contexts.