Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Guidelines recommend individualized decision-making for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults aged 76 to 84 years, a process that includes a consideration of health state and patient preference. Objective: To determine whether a targeted patient decision aid would align older adults' screening preference with their potential to benefit from CRC screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a prespecified secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial. Participants aged 70 to 84 years who were not up to date with screening and had an appointment within 6 weeks were purposively sampled by health state (poor, intermediate, or good) at 14 community-based primary care practices and block randomized to receive the intervention or control. Patients were recruited from March 1, 2012, to February 28, 2015, and these secondary analyses were performed from January 15 to March 1, 2022. Interventions: Patient decision aid targeted to age and sex. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of this analysis was patient preference for CRC screening. The a priori hypothesis was that the decision aid (intervention) group would reduce the proportion preferring screening among those in poor and intermediate health compared with the control group. Results: Among the 424 participants, the mean (SD) age was 76.8 (4.2) years; 248 (58.5%) of participants were women; and 333 (78.5%) were White. The proportion preferring screening in the intervention group was less than in the control group for those in the intermediate health state (34 of 76 [44.7%] vs 40 of 73 [54.8%]; absolute difference, -10.1% [95% CI, -26.0% to 5.9%]) and in the poor health state (24 of 62 [38.7%] vs 33 of 61 [54.1%]; absolute difference, -15.4% [95% CI, -32.8% to 2.0%]). These differences were not statistically significant. The proportion of those in good health who preferred screening was similar between the intervention and control groups (44 of 74 [59.5%] for intervention vs 46 of 75 [61.3%] for control; absolute difference, -1.9% [95% CI, -17.6% to 13.8%]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this secondary analysis of a clinical trial did not demonstrate statistically significant differences in patient preferences between the health groups. Additional studies that are appropriately powered are needed to determine the effect of the decision aid on the preferences of older patients for CRC screening by health state. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01575990.

Vitamin D Supplementation for Prevention of Cancer: The D2d Cancer Outcomes (D2dCA) Ancillary Study.

CONTEXT: Observational studies suggest that low vitamin D status may be a risk factor for cancer. OBJECTIVE: In a population with prediabetes and overweight/obesity that is at higher risk of cancer than the general population, we sought to determine if vitamin D supplementation lowers the risk of cancer and precancers. METHODS: The Vitamin D and type 2 diabetes (D2d) cancer outcomes study (D2dCA) is an ancillary study to the D2d study, which was conducted at 22 academic medical centers in the United States. Participants had prediabetes and overweight/obesity and were free of cancer for the previous 5 years. Participants were randomized to receive vitamin D3 4000 IU daily or placebo. At scheduled study visits (4 times/year), cancer and precancer events were identified by questionnaires. Clinical data were collected and adjudicated for all reported events. Cox proportional hazard models compared the hazard ratio (HR) of incident cancers and precancers between groups. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up period of 2.9 years, among 2385 participants (mean age 60 years and 25-hydroxyvitamin D 28 ng/mL), there were 89 cases of cancer. The HR of incident cancer for vitamin D vs placebo was 1.07 (95% CI 0.70, 1.62). Of 241 participants with incident precancers, 239 had colorectal adenomatous polyps. The HR for colorectal polyps for vitamin D vs placebo was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64, 1.07). CONCLUSION: In the D2d population of participants with prediabetes and overweight/obesity, not selected for vitamin D insufficiency, vitamin D supplementation did not have a significant effect on risk of incident cancer or colorectal polyps.

Protocol Summary of the COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE) Validation in Primary Care Study.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often remains undiagnosed and untreated. To date, COPD screening/case finding has not been designed to identify clinically significant COPD, disease ready for therapies beyond smoking cessation. Herein, we describe the ongoing prospective, pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial to assess specificity and sensitivity of the COPD Assessment in Primary Care To Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE) tool consisting of 5 questions and peak expiratory flow. The tool is designed to identify clinically significant COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] to forced vital capacity [FVC] ratio <.70 plus FEV1% predicted <60% or increased risk for exacerbation) and the trial will explore the impact of CAPTURE-based screening on COPD diagnosis and treatment rates in primary care patients. Of a total planned enrollment of 5000 English- or Spanish-speaking patients 45 to 80 years of age without a prior COPD diagnosis from 100 primary care practices, a total of 68 practices and 3064 patients have been enrolled in the study. Practices are centrally randomized to either usual care or clinician receipt of patient-level CAPTURE results. All clinicians receive basic COPD education with those in intervention practices also receiving CAPTURE interpretation education. In a single visit, patient participants complete a CAPTURE screening, pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry and baseline demographic and health questionnaires to validate CAPTURE sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of identifying undiagnosed, clinically significant COPD. One-year follow-up chart reviews and participant surveys assess the impact of sharing versus not sharing CAPTURE results with clinicians on clinical outcomes including level of respiratory symptoms and events and clinicians' initiation of recommendation-concordant COPD care. This is one of the first U.S. studies to validate and assess impact of a simple COPD screening tool in primary care.

Comparative implementation-effectiveness of three strategies to perform hearing screening among older adults in primary care clinics: study design and protocol.

BACKGROUND: The burden of hearing loss among older adults could be mitigated with appropriate care. This study compares implementation of three hearing screening strategies in primary care, and examines the reliability and validity of patient self-assessment, primary care providers (PCP) and diagnostic audiologists in the identification of 'red flag' conditions (those conditions that may require medical consultation and/or intervention). METHODS: Six primary care practices will implement one of three screening strategies (2 practices per strategy) with 660 patients (220 per strategy) ages 65-75 years with no history of hearing aid use or diagnosis of hearing loss. Strategies differ on the location and use of PCP encouragement to complete a telephone-based hearing screen (tele-HS). Group 1: instructions for tele-HS to complete at home and educational materials on warning signs and consequences of hearing loss. Group 2: PCP counseling/encouragement on importance of hearing screening, instructions to take the tele-HS from home, educational materials. Group 3: PCP counseling/encouragement, in-office tele-HS, and educational materials. Patients from all groups who fail the tele-HS will be referred for diagnostic audiological testing and medical evaluation, and complete a self-assessment of red flag conditions at this follow-up appointment. Due to the expected low incidence of ear disease in the PCP cohort, we will enroll a complementary population of patients (N = 500) from selected otolaryngology head and neck surgery clinics in a national practice-based research network to increase the likelihood of occurrence of medical conditions that might contraindicate hearing aid fitting. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who complete the tele-HS within 2 months of the PCP appointment comparing Group 3 (PCP encouragement, in-office tele-HS, education) versus Groups 2 and 1 (education and tele-HS at home, with and without PCP encouragement, respectively). The several secondary outcomes include direct and indirect costs, patient, family and provider attitudes of hearing healthcare, and accuracy of red flag condition evaluations compared with expert medical assessment by an otolaryngology provider. DISCUSSION: Determining the relative effectiveness of three different strategies for hearing screening in primary care and the assessment accuracy of red flag conditions can each lead to practice and policy changes that will reduce individual, family and societal burden from hearing loss among older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02928107; 10/10/2016 protocol version 1.

Effect of Depression Screening After Acute Coronary Syndromes on Quality of Life: The CODIACS-QoL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and elevated depressive symptoms are at increased risk for recurrent cardiovascular events and mortality, worse quality of life, and higher health care costs. These observational findings prompted multiple scientific panels to advise universal depression screening in survivors of ACS prior to evidence from randomized screening trials. Objective: To determine whether systematically screening for depression in survivors of ACS improves quality of life and depression compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-group multisite randomized trial enrolled 1500 patients with ACS from 4 health care systems between November 1, 2013, and March 31, 2017, with follow-up ending July 31, 2018. Patients were eligible if they had been hospitalized for ACS in the previous 2 to 12 months and had no prior history of depression. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Interventions: Patients with ACS were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive (1) systematic depression screening using the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire, with notification of primary care clinicians and provision of centralized, patient-preference, stepped depression care for those with positive screening results (8-item Patient Health Questionnaire score ≥10; screen, notify, and treat, n = 499); (2) systematic depression screening, with notification of primary care clinicians for those with positive screening results (screen and notify, n = 501); and (3) usual care (no screening, n = 500). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in quality-adjusted life-years. The secondary outcome was depression-free days. Adverse effects and mortality were assessed by patient interview and hospital records. Results: A total of 1500 patients (424 women and 1076 men; mean [SD] age, 65.9 [11.5] years) were randomized in the 18-month trial. Only 71 of 1000 eligible survivors of ACS (7.1%) had elevated 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire scores indicating depressive symptoms at screening. There were no differences in mean (SD) change in quality-adjusted life-years (screen, notify and treat, -0.06 [0.20]; screen and notify, -0.06 [0.20]; no screen, -0.06 [0.18]; P = .98) or cumulative mean (SD) depression-free days (screen, notify and treat, 343.1 [179.0] days; screen and notify, 351.3 [175.0] days; no screen, 339.0 [176.6] days; P = .63). Harms including death, bleeding, or sleep difficulties did not differ among groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with ACS without a history of depression, systematic depression screening with or without providing depression treatment did not alter quality-adjusted life-years, depression-free days, or harms. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993017.

Reducing Disparities in the Quality of Palliative Care for Older African Americans through Improved Advance Care Planning: Study Design and Protocol.

Advance care planning (ACP) improves end-of-life care for patients and their caregivers. However, only one-third of adults have participated in ACP and rates are substantially lower among African Americans than among whites. Importantly, ACP improves many domains of care where there are racial disparities in outcomes, including receipt of goal-concordant care, hospice use, and provider communication. Yet, few studies have examined the effectiveness of ACP interventions among African Americans. The objectives of reducing disparities in the quality of palliative care for older African Americans through improved advance care planning (EQUAL ACP) are as follows: to compare the effectiveness of two interventions in (1) increasing ACP among African Americans and whites and (2) reducing racial disparities in both ACP and end-of-life care; and to examine whether racial concordance of the interventionist and patient is associated with ACP. EQUAL ACP is a longitudinal, multisite, cluster randomized trial and a qualitative study describing the ACP experience of participants. The study will include 800 adults ≥65 years of age (half African American and half white) from 10 primary care clinics in the South. Eligible patients have a serious illness (advanced cancer, heart failure, lung disease, etc.), disability in activities of daily living, or recent hospitalization. Patients are followed for one year and participate in either a patient-guided, self-management ACP approach, including a Five Wishes form or structured ACP with Respecting Choices First Steps. The primary outcome is formal or informal ACP-completion of advance directives, documented discussions with clinicians, and other written or verbal communication with surrogate decision makers about care preferences. Secondary outcomes assessed through after-death interviews with surrogates of patients who die during the study include receipt of goal-concordant care, health services use in the last year of life, and satisfaction with care. EQUAL ACP is the first large study to assess which strategies are most effective at both increasing rates of ACP and promoting equitable palliative care outcomes for seriously ill African Americans.

Rationale, design, and baseline data for a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing depression screening strategies after acute coronary syndrome: The comparison of depression identification after acute Coronary Syndromes-Quality of Life and Cost Outcomes (CODIACS-QOL) trial.

BACKGROUND: Elevated depressive symptoms among survivors of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) confer recurrent cardiovascular events and mortality, worse quality of life, and higher healthcare costs. While multiple scientific groups advise routine depression screening for ACS survivors, no randomized trials exist to inform this screening recommendation. We aimed to assess the effect of screening for depression on change in quality of life over 18 months among ACS patients. METHODS: The Comparison of Depression Identification after Acute Coronary Syndrome on Quality of Life and Cost Outcomes (CODIACS-QoL) trial is a pragmatic, 3-arm trial that randomized ACS patients to 1) systematic depression screening using the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and if positive screen (PHQ-8 ≥ 10), notification of primary care providers (PCPs) and invitation to participate in centralized, patient-preference, stepped depression care (Screen, Notify, and Treat, N = 499); 2) systematic depression screening and PCP notification only (Screen and Notify, N = 501); and 3) usual care (No Screen, N = 500). Adults hospitalized for ACS in the previous 2-12 months without prior history of depression were eligible for participation. Key outcomes will be quality-adjusted life years (primary), cost of health care utilization, and depression-free days across 18 months. RESULTS: A total of 1500 patients were randomized in the CODIACS-QOL trial (28.3% women; 16.3% Hispanic; mean age 65.9 (11.5) years). Only 7% of ACS survivors had elevated depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Using a novel randomization schema and pragmatic design principles, the CODIACS-QoL trial achieved its enrollment target. Eventual results of this trial will inform future depression screening recommendations in cardiac patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01993017).

Assessing Key Stakeholders' Knowledge, Needs, and Preferences for Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Plans.

Cancer survivorship care plans (SCPs) are endorsed to support quality care for cancer survivors, but uptake is slow. We assessed knowledge, needs, and preferences for SCP content and delivery from a wide variety of stakeholders. We focused SCP content for head and neck cancer as it is a disease prone to long-term side effects requiring management from multiple providers. We conducted telephone-based, qualitative interviews. We purposively sampled head and neck cancer survivors (n = 4), primary care physicians in the community (n = 5), and providers affiliated with a large academic medical center (n = 5) who treat head and neck cancer, cancer specialists (n = 6), and nurse practitioners/supportive care staff (n = 5). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using direct content analysis. Few participants reported personal experience with SCPs, but most supported the concept. Several key themes emerged: (1) perceived ambiguity regarding roles and responsibilities for SCPs, (2) a need to tailor the content and language based on the intended recipient, (3) documentation process should be as automated and streamlined as possible, (4) concerns about using the SCP to coordinate with outside providers, and (5) that SCPs would have added value as a "living document." We also report SCP-related issues that are unique to serving patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer. Effort is needed to tailor SCPs for different recipients and optimize their potential for successful implementation, impact on care outcomes, and sustainability. Many cancer survivors may not receive a SCP as part of routine care. Survivors could engage their health care team by requesting a SCP.

Exploring factors that might influence primary-care provider discussion of and recommendation for prostate and colon cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Primary-care providers may contribute to the use of low-value cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine circumstances under which primary-care providers would discuss and recommend two types of cancer screening services across a spectrum of net benefit and other factors known to influence screening. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a cross sectional survey of 126 primary-care providers in 24 primary-care clinics in the US. Participants completed surveys with two hypothetical screening scenarios for prostate or colorectal cancer (CRC). Patients in the scenarios varied by age and screening-request status. For each scenario, providers indicated whether they would discuss and recommend screening. Providers also reported on their screening attitudes and the influence of other factors known to affect screening (short patient visits, worry about lawsuits, clinical reminders/performance measures, and screening guidelines). We examined associations between providers' attitudes and their screening recommendations for hypothetical 90-year-olds (the lowest-value screening). RESULTS: Providers reported they would discuss cancer screening more often than they would recommend it (P<0.001). More providers would discuss and recommend screening for CRC than prostate cancer (P<0.001), for younger than older patients (P<0.001), and when the patient requested it than when not (P<0.001). For a 90-year-old patient, every point increase in cancer-specific screening attitude increased the likelihood of a screening recommendation (30% for prostate cancer and 30% for CRC). DISCUSSION: While most providers' reported practice patterns aligned with net benefit, some providers would discuss and recommend low-value cancer screening, particularly when faced with a patient request. CONCLUSION: More work appears to be needed to help providers to discuss and recommend screening that aligns with value.

Quantifying sociodemographic and income disparities in medical therapy and lifestyle among symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a cross-sectional study in North America.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate potential gaps in preventive medical therapy and healthy lifestyle practices among symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) seeing primary care physicians and cardiologists and how gaps vary by sociodemographic characteristics and baseline cardiovascular risk. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study assessing potential preventive gaps. PARTICIPANTS: 10 003 symptomatic outpatients evaluated by primary care physicians, cardiologists or other specialists for suspected CAD. SETTING: PROspective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Painfrom 2010 to 2014. MEASURES: Primary measures were absence of an antihypertensive, statin or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker for renal protection in patients with hypertension, dyslipidaemia or diabetes, respectively, and being sedentary, smoking or being obese. RESULTS: Preventive treatment gaps affected 14% of patients with hypertension, 36% of patients with dyslipidaemia and 32% of patients with diabetes. Overall, 49% of patients were sedentary, 18% currently smoked and 48% were obese. Women were significantly more likely to not take a statin for dyslipidaemia and to be sedentary. Patients with lower socioeconomic status were also significantly more likely to not take a statin. Compared with Whites, Blacks were significantly more likely to be obese, while Asians were less likely to smoke or be obese. High-risk patients sometimes experienced larger preventive care gaps than low-risk patients. For patients with dyslipidaemia, the presence of a treatment gap was associated with a higher risk of an adverse event (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.82). CONCLUSIONS: Among contemporary, symptomatic patients with suspected CAD, significant gaps exist in preventive care and lifestyle practices, and high-risk patients sometimes had larger gaps. Differences by sex, age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status and geography are modest but contribute to disparities and have implications for improving opulation health. For patients with dyslipidaemia, the presence of a treatment gap was associated with a higher risk of an adverse event. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov identifier NCT01174550.

Changes in Medical Therapy and Lifestyle After Anatomical or Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic testing in the care of patients newly presenting with symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease may influence risk factor management, independent of test type or test results. However, little is known about changes in medications and lifestyle after anatomical or functional testing. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined what factors influenced preventive medical therapy and lifestyle practices at 60 days among 10 003 symptomatic patients (53% women; mean age 61 years) randomly assigned to anatomical testing with coronary computed tomographic angiography or functional testing (NCT01174550). We also assessed the association of preventive changes with major cardiovascular events. There were no differences in medications/lifestyle at baseline. At 60 days, relative to baseline, the computed tomographic angiography strategy was associated with a higher proportion of patients newly initiating aspirin (11.8% versus 7.8%), statins (12.7% versus 6.2%), and ß-blockers (8.1% versus 5.3%), compared to functional testing (P<0.0001 for each). No significant differences between computed tomographic angiography and functional testing strategies were observed for initiation of exercise, quitting smoking, or weight loss in overweight/obese patients, though overall prevalence of healthy eating was higher after computed tomographic angiography (P=0.002) while obese/overweight status was lower (P=0.040). Positive initial test results and revascularization demonstrated stronger associations with preventive medications and lifestyle than test type. Medication initiation was not associated with fewer cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: Positive initial test results and revascularization are primary drivers of changes in preventive medical and lifestyle practices, with test type making secondary contributions. However, substantial opportunities exist to further reduce cardiovascular risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01174550.

A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Alternate Formats for Presenting Benefits and Harms Information for Low-Value Screening Services: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Healthcare overuse, the delivery of low-value services, is increasingly recognized as a critical problem. However, little is known about the comparative effectiveness of alternate formats for presenting benefits and harms information to patients as a strategy to reduce overuse. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of different benefits and harms presentations on patients' intentions to accept low-value or potentially low-value screening services (prostate cancer screening in men ages 50-69 years; osteoporosis screening in low-risk women ages 50-64 years; or colorectal cancer screening in men and women ages 76-85 years). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trial of 775 individuals eligible to receive information about any 1 of the 3 screening services and scheduled for a visit with their clinician. Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 intervention arms that differed in terms of presentation format: words, numbers, numbers plus narrative, and numbers plus framed presentation. The trial was conducted from September 2012 to June 2014 at 2 family medicine and 2 internal medicine practices affiliated with the Duke Primary Care Research Consortium. The data were analyzed between May and September of 2015. INTERVENTIONS: One-page evidence-based decision support sheets on each of the 3 screening services, with benefits and harms information presented in 1 of 4 formats: words, numbers, numbers plus narratives, or numbers plus a framed presentation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in intention to accept screening (on a response scale from 1 to 5). Our secondary outcomes included general and disease-specific knowledge, perceived risk and consequences of disease, screening attitudes, perceived net benefit of screening, values clarity, and self-efficacy for screening. RESULTS: We enrolled and randomly allocated 775 individuals, aged 50 to 85 years, to 1 of 4 intervention arms: 195 to words, 192 to numbers, 196 to narrative, and 192 to framed formats. Intentions to accept screening were high before the intervention and change in intentions did not differ across intervention arms (words, -0.07; numbers, -0.05; numbers plus narrative, -0.12; numbers plus framed presentation, -0.02; P = .57 for all comparisons). Change in other outcomes also showed no difference across intervention arms. Results were similar when stratified by screening service. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Single, brief, written decision support interventions, such as the ones in this study, are unlikely to be sufficient to change intentions for screening. Alternate and additional interventions are needed to reduce overused screening services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01694784.

Adult Patients' Perspectives on the Benefits and Harms of Overused Screening Tests: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been a growing interest in reducing the overuse of healthcare services. However, little is known about how patients conceptualize the benefits and harms of overused screening tests or how patients make decisions regarding these tests. OBJECTIVE: To determine how patients think about the harms and benefits of overused screening tests and how they consider these and other factors when making decisions. DESIGN: Semi-structured, qualitative interviews. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 50 patients, ages 50-84, who had previously received or not received any of four overused screening services: 1) prostate cancer screening (men ages 50-69), 2) colon cancer screening (men and women ages 76-85), 3) osteoporosis screening (low-risk women ages 50-64), or 4) cardiovascular disease screening (low-risk men and women ages 50-85). APPROACH: We conducted a thematic analysis, using a hybrid inductive-deductive approach. Two independent coders analyzed interview transcriptions to identify themes and exemplifying quotes. KEY RESULTS: Many patients could not name a harm of screening. When they did name harms, patients often focused on only the harms of the screening test itself and rarely mentioned harms further along the screening cascade (e.g., from follow-up testing and treatment). In contrast, patients could easily name benefits of screening, although many seemed to misunderstand or overestimate the magnitude of the benefits. Furthermore, patients described many additional factors they considered when making screening decisions, including their clinicians' recommendations, their age, family or friends' experiences with disease, and insurance coverage. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the need to help adults recognize and understand the benefits and harms of screening and make appropriate decisions about overused screening tests.

Antibody responses among adolescent females receiving the quadrivalent HPV vaccine series corresponding to standard or non-standard dosing intervals.

Quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV4) is recommended as a 3-dose series administered at 0, 1-2, and 6 months. However, this dosing schedule is often not followed leading to longer dosing intervals. We conducted a prospective study to assess antibody titers to HPV4 when dose 2 and/or dose 3 were administered on schedule or delayed. Healthy females (N=331) aged 9-18 years were enrolled at the time of receipt of HPV4 dose 2 or 3. Participants were classified as belonging to one of four groups depending upon timing of receipt of HPV4: both doses on time; only dose 2 delayed later than 90 days; only dose 3 delayed later than 180 days; or both doses 2 and 3 delayed. Pre- and post-dose 3 blood samples were assayed for HPV antibody titers (types 6, 11, 16, and 18). Post-dose 3 geometric mean titers (GMTs) for all HPV types were not significantly lower for any of the delayed dosing groups when compared to the on time group. When compared to the on time group, the post dose 3 GMTs in the delayed dose 3 group were significantly higher (p<0.05) for HPV types 6, 11, and 16. Our findings suggest that delays of dose 2 or 3 do not interfere with immune responses after completion of the 3-dose series. These results support current recommendations to not administer additional doses of HPV4 vaccine if dose 2, dose 3, or both doses have been administered late.

Nurse-led behavioral management of diabetes and hypertension in community practices: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Several trials have demonstrated the efficacy of nurse telephone case management for diabetes (DM) and hypertension (HTN) in academic or vertically integrated systems. Little is known about the real-world potency of these interventions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of nurse behavioral management of DM and HTN in community practices among patients with both diseases. DESIGN: The study was designed as a patient-level randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included adult patients with both type 2 DM and HTN who were receiving care at one of nine community fee-for-service practices. Subjects were required to have inadequately controlled DM (hemoglobin A1c [A1c] ≥ 7.5%) but could have well-controlled HTN. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received a call from a nurse experienced in DM and HTN management once every two months over a period of two years, for a total of 12 calls. Intervention patients received tailored DM- and HTN- focused behavioral content; control patients received non-tailored, non-interactive information regarding health issues unrelated to DM and HTN (e.g., skin cancer prevention). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and A1c were co-primary outcomes, measured at 6, 12, and 24 months; 24 months was the primary time point. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-seven subjects were enrolled; 193 were randomized to intervention, 184 to control. Subjects were 55% female and 50% white; the mean baseline A1c was 9.1% (SD = 1%) and mean SBP was 142 mmHg (SD = 20). Eighty-two percent of scheduled interviews were conducted; 69% of intervention patients and 70% of control patients reached the 24-month time point. Expressing model estimated differences as (intervention--control), at 24 months, intervention patients had similar A1c [diff = 0.1 %, 95 % CI (-0.3, 0.5), p = 0.51] and SBP [diff = -0.9 mmHg, 95% CI (-5.4, 3.5), p = 0.68] values compared to control patients. Likewise, DBP (diff = 0.4 mmHg, p = 0.76), weight (diff = 0.3 kg, p = 0.80), and physical activity levels (diff = 153 MET-min/week, p = 0.41) were similar between control and intervention patients. Results were also similar at the 6- and 12-month time points. CONCLUSIONS: In nine community fee-for-service practices, telephonic nurse case management did not lead to improvement in A1c or SBP. Gains seen in telephonic behavioral self-management interventions in optimal settings may not translate to the wider range of primary care settings.

Pain in adolescent girls receiving human papillomavirus vaccine with concomitantly administered vaccines.

Using the Faces Pain Scale - Revised, we assessed injection site pain 10 minutes after vaccination in young females randomized to receive either quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV4) before or after concomitantly administered vaccines. Although pain was modestly more after HPV4 injection than after other vaccines, the pain intensity after HPV4 injection was significantly less in those who received HPV4 before receiving other concomitant vaccines.

Comparative effectiveness of endovascular and surgical revascularization for patients with peripheral artery disease and critical limb ischemia: systematic review of revascularization in critical limb ischemia.

BACKGROUND: For patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), the optimal treatment to enhance limb preservation, prevent death, and improve functional status is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the comparative effectiveness of endovascular revascularization and surgical revascularization in patients with CLI. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant English-language studies published from January 1995 to August 2012. Two investigators screened each abstract and full-text article for inclusion, abstracted the data, and performed quality ratings and evidence grading. Random-effects models were used to compute summary estimates of effects, with endovascular treatment as the control group. RESULTS: We identified a total of 23 studies, including 1 randomized controlled trial, which reported no difference in amputation-free survival at 3 years (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI 0.84-1.77) and all-cause mortality (OR 1.07, 0.73-1.56) between the 2 treatments. Meta-analysis of the observational studies showed a statistically nonsignificant reduction in all-cause mortality at 6 months (11 studies, OR 0.85, 0.57-1.27) and amputation-free survival at 1 year (2 studies, OR 0.76, 0.48-1.21) in patients treated with endovascular revascularization. There was no difference in overall death, amputation, or amputation-free survival at ≥2 years. CONCLUSIONS: The currently available literature suggests that there is no difference in clinical outcomes for patients with CLI treated with endovascular or surgical revascularization. There is a paucity of high-quality data available to guide clinical decision making, especially as it pertains to patient subgroups or anatomical considerations.

Can physicians accurately predict which patients will lose weight, improve nutrition and increase physical activity?

BACKGROUND: Physician counselling may help patients increase physical activity, improve nutrition and lose weight. However, physicians have low outcome expectations that patients will change. The aims are to describe the accuracy of physicians' outcome expectations about whether patients will follow weight loss, nutrition and physical activity recommendations. The relationships between physician outcome expectations and patient motivation and confidence also are assessed. METHODS: This was an observational study that audio recorded encounters between 40 primary care physicians and 461 of their overweight or obese patients. We surveyed physicians to assess outcome expectations that patients will lose weight, improve nutrition and increase physical activity after counselling. We assessed actual patient change in behaviours from baseline to 3 months after the encounter and changes in motivation and confidence from baseline to immediately post-encounter. RESULTS: Right after the visit, ~55% of the time physicians were optimistic that their individual patients would improve. Physicians were not very accurate about which patients actually would improve weight, nutrition and physical activity. More patients had higher confidence to lose weight when physicians thought that patients would be likely to follow their weight loss recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians are moderately optimistic that patients will follow their weight loss, nutrition and physical activity recommendations. Patients might perceive physicians' confidence in them and thus feel more confident themselves. Physicians, however, are not very accurate in predicting which patients will or will not change behaviours. Their optimism, although helpful for patient confidence, might make physicians less receptive to learning effective counselling techniques.

Do the five A's work when physicians counsel about weight loss?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: More than two thirds of Americans are overweight or obese. Physician counseling may help patients lose weight; however, physicians perceive these discussions as somewhat futile and time-consuming. An effective and efficient tool for smoking cessation is the Five A's (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange). We studied the effectiveness of the Five A's in weight-loss counseling. METHODS: We audiorecorded primary care encounters between 40 physicians and 461 of their overweight or obese patients. All were told the study was about preventive health, not weight specifically. Encounters were coded for physician use of the Five A's. Patients' motivation and confidence were assessed before and immediately after the encounter. Three months later, we assessed patient change in dietary fat intake, exercise, and weight. RESULTS: Generalized linear models were fit adjusting for patient clustering within physician. Physicians used at least one of the Five A's often (83%). Physicians routinely Ask and Advise patients to lose weight; however, they rarely Assess, Assist, or Arrange. Assist and Arrange were related to diet improvement, whereas Advise was associated with increases in motivation and confidence to change dietary fat intake and confidence to lose weight. CONCLUSIONS: Similar to smoking cessation counseling, physicians routinely Asked and Advised patients to lose weight; however, they rarely Assessed, Assisted, or Arranged. Given the potential impact of using all of these counseling tools on changing patient behavior, physicians should be encouraged to increase their use of the Five A's when counseling patients to lose weight.