Patient-centered physical activity coaching in COPD (Walk On!): A study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity is significantly associated with more frequent hospitalizations and increased mortality in COPD even after adjusting for disease severity. While practice guidelines recommend regular physical activity for all patients with COPD, health systems are challenged in operationalizing an effective and sustainable approach to assist patients in being physically active. METHODS: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial design was used to determine the effectiveness of a 12-month home and community-based physical activity coaching intervention (Walk On!) compared to standard care for 1650 patients at high risk for COPD exacerbations from a large integrated health care system. Eligible patients with a COPD-related hospitalization, emergency department visit, or observational stay in the previous 12months were automatically identified from the electronic medical records (EMR) system and randomized to treatment arms. The Walk On! intervention included collaborative monitoring of step counts, semi-automated step goal recommendations, individualized reinforcement from a physical activity coach, and peer/family support. RESULTS: The primary composite outcome included all-cause hospitalizations, emergency department visits, observational stays, and death in the 12months following randomization. Secondary outcomes included COPD-related utilization, cardio-metabolic markers, physical activity, symptoms, and health-related quality of life. With the exception of patient reported outcomes, all utilization and clinical variables were automatically captured from the EMR. CONCLUSIONS: If successful, findings from this multi-stakeholder driven trial of a generalizable and scalable physical activity intervention, carefully designed with sufficient flexibility, intensity, and support for a large ethnically diverse sample could re-define the standard of care to effectively address physical inactivity in COPD.

Variation in care for recurrent nonmelanoma skin cancer in a university-based practice and a veterans affairs clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To learn if treatment of recurrent nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) varied in different practice settings. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of consecutive patients with recurrent NMSC. SETTING: A university-based dermatology practice and the dermatology clinic at the affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC). Conventional therapies for NMSC were available at both sites. Patients All 191 patients diagnosed as having recurrent NMSC in 1999 and 2000 were included in the study. Data were collected from medical record review and surveys mailed to patients. Main Outcome Measure Performance of Mohs micrographic surgery (Mohs). RESULTS: Patients at the VAMC were older, less educated, poorer, and had more comorbid illnesses, but their tumors were similar to those of patients at the university-based practice. Treatment choices differed at the 2 sites: the proportions of tumors treated in the VAMC and university sites were 60% and 14%, respectively, for excisional surgery; and 24% and 61%, respectively, for Mohs (P < .001). In multivariate analyses adjusting for patient, tumor, and physician features that may have affected treatment choice, tumors treated at the university-based site remained significantly more likely to be treated with Mohs (odds ratio, 8.68 [95% confidence interval, 3.66-20.55]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation existed in the treatment of recurrent NMSC in different practice settings. This variation was not explained by measured clinical characteristics of the patients or the tumors.

Variation in care for nonmelanoma skin cancer in a private practice and a veterans affairs clinic.

BACKGROUND: Nonmelanoma skin cancer is the most common malignancy. Multiple therapies prevent recurrence but vary widely in cost. The most common therapies are local destruction, excision, and Mohs surgery (histologically guided tumor removal). Clinical variables that may affect treatment choices can be identified, but little is known about how clinicians choose among therapies. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to learn if variations exist in the treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer in different practice settings. RESEARCH DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: Subjects consisted of consecutive patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer at a university-affiliated private dermatology practice and the dermatology clinic at the nearby affiliated Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center. DATA: We studied data from medical records and patient surveys. RESULTS: Overall, 1777 nonrecurrent nonmelanoma skin cancers were diagnosed in 1375 patients. Compared with the VA site, patients at the private site were younger, more likely to be female, and less likely to be poor, and their tumors were smaller and less likely to be on visible areas of the body. Treatments varied between the 2 sites (P <0.001). The proportions of tumors treated at the private and VA sites, respectively, were 23% and 19% for destruction, 25% and 48% for excision, and 37% and 25% for Mohs surgery. In multiple clinical subgroups, Mohs surgery was more likely to be performed at the private site than at the VA. Moreover, in multivariable models controlling for clinical features that may have affected treatment choice, tumors at the private site were more likely than tumors at the VA to be treated with Mohs surgery (odds ratio, 2.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-3.70). CONCLUSIONS: Care for nonmelanoma skin cancer varied at 2 academic practice sites that are near each other and that share some clinician staff. These findings raise questions not only about overuse or underuse of procedures at the 2 sites, but also about systematic differences in patient preferences and/or physician incentives in prepaid and fee-for-service settings.