Factors influencing smartwatch use and comfort with health data sharing: a sequential mixed-method study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Smartwatches have become ubiquitous for tracking health metrics. These data sets hold substantial potential for enhancing healthcare and public health initiatives; it may be used to track chronic health conditions, detect previously undiagnosed health conditions and better understand public health trends. By first understanding the factors influencing one's continuous use of the device, it will be advantageous to assess factors that may influence a person's willingness to share their individual data sets. This study seeks to comprehensively understand the factors influencing the continued use of these devices and people's willingness to share the health data they generate. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-section online survey of smartwatch users over the age of 18 will be conducted (n ≥200). The first section, based on the expectation-confirmation model, will assess factors influencing continued use of smartwatches while the second section will assess willingness to share the health data generated from these devices. Survey data will be analysed descriptively and based on structural equation modelling.Subsequently, six focus groups will be conducted to further understand the issues raised in the survey. Each focus group (n=6) will consist of three smartwatch users: a general practitioner, a public health specialist and an IT specialist. Young smartwatch users (aged 18-44) will be included in three of the focus groups and middle-aged smartwatch users (aged 45-64) will be included in the other three groups. This is to enhance comparison of opinions based on age groups. Data from the focus groups will be analysed using the microinterlocutor approach and an executive summary.After the focus group, participants will complete a brief survey to indicate any changes in their opinions resulting from the discussion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of this study will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and all associated data will be deposited in a relevant, publicly accessible data repository to ensure transparency and facilitate future research endeavours.This study was approved by the Social Research Ethic Committee (SREC), University College Cork-SREC/SOM/21062023/2.

Attitudes on participation in clinical drug trials: A nationally representative survey of older adults with multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with multimorbidity are under-represented in clinical drug trials. Their inclusion will not increase unless they are willing and able to participate. Data on motivators and barriers to participation in trials of new medications of older adults with multimorbidity are needed. METHODS: Cross-sectional internet and telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of adults ≥65 years with ≥3 chronic conditions (NORC University of Chicago Amerispeak Panel) conducted from March-April, 2023 to determine motivators and barriers to drug trial participation, described graphically and using statistics. RESULTS: Surveyed 1318 (1142 Internet, 176 phone) with mean age 72.3 ± 6.3 (SD), 52% women; race: 83% White, 10% Black or African American, 5% Hispanic or Latino, 1.1% Asian; 4.4 ± 1.9 chronic conditions (of 16 queried), taking 7.5 ± 3.3 medications. Barriers included fear of side effects (48%), taking too many medications (44%), placebo (44%), mobility (33%), bathroom needs (25%), hearing (19%), eyesight (15%), video visits (33%; higher in women, Black or African-American respondents, and those ≥80 years). Sixty-five percent would join all in-person trials, 49% would join all-video trials. Travel >1 h was difficult for 66%, most difficult for women. Trust was a concern in 25% of Black respondents. Caregiving responsibilities or lack of time were not obstacles. Participants were most likely to consider a drug trial for a problem they have (63%) versus prevention (44%) and if invited by a physician (80%) or University healthcare system (58%). Getting better care was ranked very important (79%) followed by helping others (57%). CONCLUSIONS: Major concerns of older patients with multimorbidity about participation in drug trials are potential side effects, taking too many medicines, and video visits. Physicians have the greatest influence on decisions and in-person visits are preferred. Proposed changes in trial design to increase enrollment of under-represented older adults may not align with patient-reported preferences.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance in Pregnant Women in the United States: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Purpose: Pregnant women are vulnerable to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) complications, yet may hesitate to get vaccinated. It is important to identify racial/ethnic and other individual characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the United States during pregnancy. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for articles published through January 2023 for keywords/terms related to immunization, COVID-19, and pregnancy, and performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine characteristics associated with vaccine acceptance. Results: Of 1,592 articles, 23 met inclusion criteria (focused on pregnant women in the United States, and their willingness or hesitation to vaccinate). Twenty-two of the studies examined receipt of ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose and/or intention to vaccinate, while one examined vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine acceptance rates ranged from 7% to 78.3%. Meta-analyses demonstrated that compared with Whites, Hispanics (odds ratios [OR] 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.91) and Blacks (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.30-0.63) had less COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, while Asians (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.10-2.88) had greater vaccine acceptance. College graduation or more (OR 3.25; 95% CI 2.53-4.17), receipt or intention to receive the influenza vaccine (OR 3.46; 95% CI 2.22-5.41), and at least part-time employment (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.66-2.72) were significantly associated with vaccine acceptance. Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccine nonacceptance in pregnant women is associated with Hispanic ethnicity and Black race, while acceptance is associated with Asian race, college education or more, at least part-time employment, and acceptance of the influenza vaccine. Future COVID-19 vaccination campaigns can target identified subgroups of pregnant women who are less likely to accept vaccination.

Outcomes of A Virtual Practice-Tailored Medicare Annual Wellness Visit Intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Interventions are needed to promote utilization of the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV), an underused opportunity to perform screenings and plan individualized preventive health services. METHOD: Using remote practice redesign and electronic health record (EHR) support, we implemented the Practice-Tailored AWV intervention in 2021 (during the COVID-19 pandemic) in 3 small community-based practices. The intervention combines EHR-based tools with practice redesign approaches and resources. Outcomes included completion of AWV and fulfillment of recommended preventive services. RESULTS: At baseline the 3 practices had 1,513 Medicare patients with at least 1 visit in the past 12 months. AWV utilization went from 7% at baseline to 54% 8 months postintervention implementation; advance care planning increased 10.7% (from 7.9% to 18.6%); depression screening increased 16.3% (from 51.7% to 68.0%); and alcohol misuse screening increased 17.3% (from 42.6% to 59.9%). Every individual preventive health service was received more often by patients with an AWV than those without. At the patient level, fulfillment of all eligible preventive services (of a maximum of 12 evaluated) went from 47.5% to 53.8% (P < .001). Subgroup analyses showed that patients with AWVs completed a greater percentage of their total recommended preventive health services than those without an AWV. CONCLUSION: Virtual implementation of an intervention that combined EHR-based tools with practice redesign approaches increased AWV and preventive services utilization in Medicare patients. Given the success of this intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic (when practices had many competing demands), greater consideration should be given to delivering future interventions virtually.

Over-the-Counter Product-Apixaban Interactions: Patient Perspectives on Information-Seeking.

CONTEXT: Patients taking direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may be at risk for bleeding if they take interacting over-the-counter (OTC) products, yet little information exists about why patients may or may not seek information about potential interactions. OBJECTIVE: To investigate perspectives of patients taking apixaban (a commonly prescribed DOAC) regarding seeking information about OTC products. STUDY DESIGN and ANALYSIS: Semi-structured interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. SETTING: Two large academic medical centers. POPULATION: English-, Mandarin-, Cantonese-, or Spanish-speaking adults taking apixaban. OUTCOME MEASURES: Themes associated with information-seeking about potential apixaban-OTC product interactions. RESULTS: Forty-six patients aged 28-93 years (35% Asian, 15% Black, 24% Hispanic, and 20% White; 58% women), were interviewed. Respondents took 172 total OTC products, of which the most common were: vitamin D and/or calcium (15%), non-vitamin non-mineral dietary supplements (13%), acetaminophen (12%), NSAIDS/aspirin (9%), and multivitamins (9%). Themes related to lack of information-seeking about OTC products included: 1) failure to recognize that apixaban-OTC product interactions might exist; 2) beliefs that providers are responsible for disseminating information about interactions; 3) previous suboptimal interactions with providers; 4) infrequent OTC product use; and 5) lack of prior problems with OTC product use (with or without concomitant apixaban use). Conversely, themes associated with seeking information included: 1) believing that patients are responsible for their own medication-related safety; 2) greater trust in providers; 3) unfamiliarity with the OTC product; and 4) prior medication-related problems. Patients noted that information sources ranged from in-person sources (e.g., physicians, pharmacists) to online and written materials. CONCLUSIONS: Patients taking apixaban raised reasons for information-seeking about OTC products related to their perceptions of OTC products, provider-patient interactions, and their prior experiences with and frequency of OTC product use. Greater patient education about the need for information-seeking about potential DOAC-OTC product interactions may be needed at the time of prescribing.

Perspectives Regarding Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Among Individuals with Mental Illness.

Most people with co-occurring opioid use disorder (OUD) and mental illness do not receive effective medications for treating OUD. To investigate perspectives of adults in a publicly-funded mental health system regarding medications for OUD (MOUD), we conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 13 adults with OUD (current or previous diagnosis) receiving mental health treatment. Themes that emerged included: perceiving or using MOUDs as a substitute for opioids or a temporary solution to prevent withdrawal symptoms; negative perceptions about methadone/methadone clinics; and viewing MOUD use as "cheating". Readiness to quit was important for patients to consider MOUDs. All participants were receptive to discussing MOUDs with their mental health providers and welcomed the convenience of receiving care for their mental health and OUD at the same location. In conclusion, clients at publicly-funded mental health clinics support MOUD treatment, signaling a need to expand access and build awareness of MOUDs in these settings.

External Validation of the COVID-NoLab and COVID-SimpleLab Prognostic Tools.

Our objective was to externally validate 2 simple risk scores for mortality among a mostly inpatient population with COVID-19 in Canada (588 patients for COVID-NoLab and 479 patients for COVID-SimpleLab). The mortality rates in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups for COVID-NoLab were 1.1%, 9.6%, and 21.2%, respectively. The mortality rates for COVID-SimpleLab were 0.0%, 9.8%, and 20.0%, respectively. These values were similar to those in the original derivation cohort. The 2 simple risk scores, now successfully externally validated, offer clinicians a reliable way to quickly identify low-risk inpatients who could potentially be managed as outpatients in the event of a bed shortage. Both are available online (https://ebell-projects.shinyapps.io/covid_nolab/ and https://ebell-projects.shinyapps.io/COVID-SimpleLab/).

Development and Validation of a Two-Step Predictive Risk Stratification Model for Coronavirus Disease 2019 In-hospital Mortality: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Objectives: An accurate prognostic score to predict mortality for adults with COVID-19 infection is needed to understand who would benefit most from hospitalizations and more intensive support and care. We aimed to develop and validate a two-step score system for patient triage, and to identify patients at a relatively low level of mortality risk using easy-to-collect individual information. Design: Multicenter retrospective observational cohort study. Setting: Four health centers from Virginia Commonwealth University, Georgetown University, the University of Florida, and the University of California, Los Angeles. Patients: Coronavirus Disease 2019-confirmed and hospitalized adult patients. Measurements and Main Results: We included 1,673 participants from Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) as the derivation cohort. Risk factors for in-hospital death were identified using a multivariable logistic model with variable selection procedures after repeated missing data imputation. A two-step risk score was developed to identify patients at lower, moderate, and higher mortality risk. The first step selected increasing age, more than one pre-existing comorbidities, heart rate >100 beats/min, respiratory rate ≥30 breaths/min, and SpO2 <93% into the predictive model. Besides age and SpO2, the second step used blood urea nitrogen, absolute neutrophil count, C-reactive protein, platelet count, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as predictors. C-statistics reflected very good discrimination with internal validation at VCU (0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.88) and external validation at the other three health systems (range, 0.79-0.85). A one-step model was also derived for comparison. Overall, the two-step risk score had better performance than the one-step score. Conclusions: The two-step scoring system used widely available, point-of-care data for triage of COVID-19 patients and is a potentially time- and cost-saving tool in practice.

Influence of synchronous primary care telemedicine versus in-person visits on diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine can be used to manage various health conditions, but there is a need to investigate its effectiveness for chronic disease management in the primary care setting. This study compares the effect of synchronous telemedicine versus in-person primary care visits on patient clinical outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of studies published in PubMed and Web of Science between 1996 and January 2021 was performed using keywords related to telemedicine, diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Included studies compared synchronous telemedicine versus in-person visits with a primary care clinician, and examined outcomes of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), blood pressure, and/or lipid levels. RESULTS: Of 1724 citations screened, 7 publications met our inclusion criteria. Included studies were published between 2000 and 2018. Three studies were conducted in the United States, 2 in Spain, 1 in Sweden, and 1 in the United Kingdom. The telemedicine interventions investigated were multifaceted. All included synchronous visits with a primary care provider through videoconferencing and/or telephone, combined with other components such as asynchronous patient data transmission. Five studies reported on HbA1c changes, 5 on blood pressure changes, and 3 on changes in lipid levels. Compared to usual care with in-person visits, telemedicine was associated with greater reductions in HbA1c at 6 months and similar HbA1c outcomes at 12 months. Telemedicine conferred no significant differences in blood pressure and lipid levels compared to in-person clinic visits. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic review of the literature found few studies comparing clinical outcomes resulting from synchronous telemedicine versus in-person office visits, but the existing literature showed that in the primary care setting, telemedicine was not inferior to in-person visits for the management of diabetes, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia. These results hold promise for continued use of telemedicine for chronic disease management.

Opioid Use Disorder Among Clients of Community Mental Health Clinics: Prevalence, Characteristics, and Treatment Willingness.

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined the prevalence of co-occurring opioid use disorder and willingness to engage in treatment among clients of eight Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health outpatient clinics. METHODS: Adults presenting for an appointment over a 2-week period were invited to complete a voluntary, anonymous health survey. Clients who indicated opioid use in the past year were offered a longer survey assessing probable opioid use disorder. Willingness to take medication and receive treatment also was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 3,090 clients completed screening. Among these, 8% had a probable prescription (Rx) opioid use disorder and 2% a probable heroin use disorder. Of the clients with probable Rx opioid use or heroin use disorder, 49% and 25% were female, respectively. Among those with probable Rx opioid use disorder, 43% were Black, 33% were Hispanic, and 12% were White, and among those with probable heroin use disorder, 24% were Black, 22% were Hispanic, and 39% were White. Seventy-eight percent of those with Rx opioid use disorder had never received any treatment, and 82% had never taken a medication for this disorder; 39% of those with heroin use disorder had never received any treatment, and 39% had never received a medication. The strongest predictor of willingness to take a medication was believing that it would help stop opioid use (buprenorphine, ß=13.54, p=0.003, and naltrexone long-acting injection, ß=15.83, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need to identify people with opioid use disorder and to educate clients in mental health settings about medications for these disorders.

Hidden cues for approach and avoidance motivation: implicit cognitive associations among patients with Nonadherence to HIV treatment.

Although patient motivation related to HIV treatment is widely acknowledged as a key factor related to consistent adherence and engagement with medical care, research has predominantly focused on explicit rather than implicit cognitive processes that underlie motivation. This study identified and examined implicit cognitive processes that influence approach and avoidance treatment motivation in a sample of 30 HIV patients with suboptimal adherence and poor engagement with medical care. Study participants were predominantly African American (87%) and gay/bisexual (63%). We examined 173 thought statements about treatment collected from patients during two previous studies. Thematic analysis described how implicit cognitive associations influenced patients to approach or avoid treatment and medical care. Findings revealed three major contextual categories of treatment-related thoughts: links with routines and habits, connections to physical changes and reactions, and interpersonal associations. Within each category, implicit cognitive associations about treatment in terms of these daily life events and experiences cued approach and avoidance motivational tendencies without the patient's awareness. Findings from this study support the need for interventions that use implicit, less effortful approaches aimed at promoting adherence and improving the retention of patients with poor engagement.

Primary nonadherence to statin medications: Survey of patient perspectives.

Statin medications reduce cardiovascular events, but many patients never start taking their prescribed statin (primary nonadherence). Limited knowledge exists about the attitudes and beliefs of those with primary nonadherence. In this study, patients with primary nonadherence to statin medications (n = 173) completed a self-administered cross-sectional survey that assessed their attitudes and beliefs related to primary nonadherence and to potential motivators for statin use. Patients were recruited in 2019 from two academic health systems and nationwide internet advertisements. Only 49 of 173 (28.3%) patients with primary nonadherence reported having cardiovascular disease (CVD). Ninety-nine patients (57.2%) never filled their prescription, and 74 (42.8%) filled but never took any statin. Over half failed to initially inform their prescriber they might not take the statin. Patients strongly or somewhat agreed that they desired alternate treatment plans such as diet and/or exercise (n = 134; 77.4%) or natural remedies/dietary supplements (n = 125; 72.3%). Ninety-eight (56.6%) stronglyor somewhat worried about the possibility of statin dependence or addiction. Twenty-seven (15.6%) patients noted that they would not take a statin based solely on CVD risk estimates; 50 (28.9%) selected a CVD risk threshold of >20%; and 23 (13.3%) a threshold of >50% as motivating factors to take statins. Patients with primary nonadherence have attitudes about taking statins based on CVD risk that differ from scientific recommendations, may not tell providers about their hesitation to take statins, and likely prefer alternative initial approaches to cholesterol lowering. Early shared decision-making and assessment of patient attitudes about statins could potentially better align initial approaches for CVD risk reduction.

A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Physicians' Experiences With Telemedicine During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Primary care practices rapidly adopted telemedicine visits because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but information on physician perspectives about these visits is lacking. METHODS: Fifteen semistructured interviews with practicing primary care physicians and physicians-in-training from a Southern California academic health system and group-model health maintenance organization were conducted to assess physician perspectives regarding the benefits and challenges of telemedicine. RESULTS: Physicians indicated that telemedicine improved patient access to care by providing greater convenience, although some expressed concern that certain groups of vulnerable patients were unable to navigate or did not possess the technology required to participate in telemedicine visits. Physicians noted that telemedicine visits offered more time for patient counseling, opportunities for better medication reconciliations, and the ability to see and evaluate patient home environments and connect with patient families. Challenges existed when visits required a physical examination. Physicians were very concerned about the loss of personal connections and touch, which they believed diminished expected rituals that typically strengthen physician-patient relationships. Physicians also observed that careful consideration to physician workflows may be needed to avoid physician burnout. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians reported that telemedicine visits offer new opportunities to improve the quality of patient care but noted changes to their interactions with patients. Many of these changes are positive, but it remains to be seen whether others such as lack of physical examination and loss of physical presence and touch adversely influence provider-patient communication, patient willingness to disclose concerns that may affect their care, and, ultimately, patient health outcomes.

Development and Validation of the COVID-NoLab and COVID-SimpleLab Risk Scores for Prognosis in 6 US Health Systems.

PURPOSE: Develop and validate simple risk scores based on initial clinical data and no or minimal laboratory testing to predict mortality in hospitalized adults with COVID-19. METHODS: We gathered clinical and initial laboratory variables on consecutive inpatients with COVID-19 who had either died or been discharged alive at 6 US health centers. Logistic regression was used to develop a predictive model using no laboratory values (COVID-NoLab) and one adding tests available in many outpatient settings (COVID-SimpleLab). The models were converted to point scores and their accuracy evaluated in an internal validation group. RESULTS: We identified 1340 adult inpatients with complete data for nonlaboratory parameters and 741 with complete data for white blood cell (WBC) count, differential, c-reactive protein (CRP), and serum creatinine. The COVID-NoLab risk score includes age, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation and identified risk groups with 0.8%, 11.4%, and 40.4% mortality in the validation group (AUROCC = 0.803). The COVID-SimpleLab score includes age, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, WBC, CRP, serum creatinine, and comorbid asthma and identified risk groups with 1.0%, 9.1%, and 29.3% mortality in the validation group (AUROCC = 0.833). CONCLUSIONS: Because they use simple, readily available predictors, developed risk scores have potential applicability in the outpatient setting but require prospective validation before use.

Using Virtual Visits to Care for Primary Care Patients With COVID-19 Symptoms.

PURPOSE: Examine use of office resources by primary care patients who were initially evaluated through telehealth, telephone, or in-person encounters. METHODS: Retrospective electronic health record review on patients seen in March 2020 for evaluation of potential COVID-19 symptoms, to assess the total number of interactions with physicians and office staff. RESULTS: Of 202 patients, 89 (44%) had initial telehealth, 55 (27%) telephone, and 52 (26%) in-person encounters. Patients initially evaluated through telehealth, telephone, and in-person encounters had a mean of 6.1 (S.D. = 3.7), 5.2 (S.D. = 3.6), and 4.5 (S.D. = 3.0) total interactions with the office, respectively (P = .03), and 9%, 12.7%, and 19.2%, respectively, had a subsequent in-person or emergency department visit (P = .22). Multivariable analysis showed no differences in number of office interactions based on initial visit type; older patients (95% CI = 0.00-0.07) and those with subjective fevers (95% CI = 1.01-3.01) or shortness of breath (95% CI = 0.23-2.28) had more interactions with the office. CONCLUSION: Primary care providers used virtual visits to care for most patients presenting with potential COVID-19 symptoms, with many patients choosing telephone over telehealth visits. Virtual visits can successfully limit patient exposure to other people, and consideration could be given to increasing its use for patients with potential symptoms of COVID-19.

Post-Visit Patient Understanding About Newly Prescribed Medications.

BACKGROUND: Good patient understanding of basic medication-related information such as directions for use and side effects promotes medication adherence, but information is lacking about how well patients understand basic medication-related information after their office visits. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to investigate post-visit patient understanding about newly prescribed medications. DESIGN: Secondary mixed methods analysis comparing patient survey responses about newly prescribed medications to information conveyed by physicians during office visits (from audio recordings of office visits). PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-one patients aged 50 and older who discussed newly prescribed medications during an outpatient office visit. MAIN MEASURES: Accurate patient identification of medication dose, number of pills, frequency of use, duration of use, and potential side effects. KEY RESULTS: The 81 patients in this study received 111 newly prescribed medications. For over 70% of all newly prescribed medications, patients correctly identified the number of pills, frequency of use, duration of use, and dose, regardless of whether the physician mentioned the information during the office visit. However, for 34 of 62 medications (55%) for which side effects were not conveyed and 11 of 49 medications (22%) for which physicians discussed side effects, patients reported that the medication lacked side effects. Analysis of transcribed office visits showed that potential reasons for this finding included failure of physicians to mention or to use the term "side effects" during visits, the prescription of multiple medications during the visit, and lack of patient engagement in the conversation. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients correctly identified information related to directions for taking a newly prescribed medication, even without physician counseling, but when physicians failed to convey potential medication side effects, many assumed that a medication had no side effects. It may be sufficient for physicians to provide written information about medication directions and dosing, and tailor their limited time to discussing medication side effects.

Perceptions of Patients with Primary Nonadherence to Statin Medications.

BACKGROUND: Despite emphasis on efforts to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD), 13% to 34% of people never fill a prescribed statin (primary nonadherence). This study determined perceptions of adults with primary nonadherence to statins. METHODS: Ten focus groups were conducted with 61 adults reporting primary nonadherence to statins (93% without known CVD). Participants were recruited from an academic medical center and nationwide Internet advertisements. RESULTS: Major themes related to primary nonadherence were 1) desire to pursue alternatives before starting a statin (eg, diet and/or exercise, dietary supplements), 2) worry about risks and adverse effects of statins, 3) perceptions of good personal health (suggesting that a statin was not needed), and 4) doubt about the benefits of statins in the absence of disease. Additional themes included mistrust of the pharmaceutical industry, mistrust of prescribing providers, inadequate provider communication about statins, and negative prior experiences with medication. Although rare, a few patients said that high cholesterol does not require treatment if it is genetic. One third noted during focus group discussions that they did not communicate their decision not to take a statin to providers. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with primary nonadherence to statins describe seeking alternatives, avoiding perceived risks of statins, poor acceptance/understanding of CVD risk estimates, and doubts about the benefits of statins. Many do not disclose their decisions to providers, thus highlighting the need for provider awareness of the potential for primary nonadherence at the point of prescribing, and the need for future work to develop strategies to identify patients with potential primary nonadherence.