Should Organizational Investment in Robotic Surgical Technology Ever Influence Surgeons' Decisions About Surgical Approach to Patients' Surgical Care?

This commentary on a case considers balancing prospective benefits and harms of robotic technology use and argues that health care organizations should invest in centralizing robotic expertise in departments rather than having a mere collection of surgeons trained in robotics. This commentary also examines costs that should be considered in organizational determinations of robotics investments.

The Direct Clinic-Level Cost of the Implementation and Use of a Protocol to Assess and Address Social Needs in Diverse Community Health Center Primary Care Clinical Settings.

PURPOSE: Social determinants of health, including food insecurity, housing instability, social isolation, and unemployment are important drivers of health outcomes and utilization. To inform implementation of social needs screening and response protocols, there is a need to identify the associated costs in routine primary care encounters. METHODS: We interviewed key stakeholders in four diverse community health centers that had adopted a widely used social needs screening and response protocol. We evaluated costs using an activity-based costing tool across both the initial implementation phase and ongoing maintenance phase. RESULTS: Clinic costs were associated with workforce development, planning, and electronic health record integration. These initial implementation costs varied by site ($6,644-$49,087). On a per-patient basis, ongoing maintenance costs ranged from $9.76 to $47.98. CONCLUSION: Our findings can aid in designing reimbursement mechanisms tied to social needs screening and response to accelerate translational efforts and promote health equity.

Implementation of social needs screening in primary care: a qualitative study using the health equity implementation framework.

BACKGROUND: Screening in primary care for unmet individual social needs (e.g., housing instability, food insecurity, unemployment, social isolation) is critical to addressing their deleterious effects on patients' health outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the first study to apply an implementation science framework to identify implementation factors and best practices for social needs screening and response. METHODS: Guided by the Health Equity Implementation Framework (HEIF), we collected qualitative data from clinicians and patients to evaluate barriers and facilitators to implementing the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients' Assets, Risks, and Experiences (PRAPARE), a standardized social needs screening and response protocol, in a federally qualified health center. Eligible patients who received the PRAPARE as a standard of care were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. We also obtained front-line clinician perspectives in a semi-structured focus group. HEIF domains informed a directed content analysis. RESULTS: Patients and clinicians (i.e., case managers) reported implementation barriers and facilitators across multiple domains (e.g., clinical encounters, patient and provider factors, inner context, outer context, and societal influence). Implementation barriers included structural and policy level determinants related to resource availability, discrimination, and administrative burden. Facilitators included evidence-based clinical techniques for shared decision making (e.g., motivational interviewing), team-based staffing models, and beliefs related to alignment of the PRAPARE with patient-centered care. We found high levels of patient acceptability and opportunities for adaptation to increase equitable adoption and reach. CONCLUSION: Our results provide practical insight into the implementation of the PRAPARE or similar social needs screening and response protocols in primary care at the individual encounter, organizational, community, and societal levels. Future research should focus on developing discrete implementation strategies to promote social needs screening and response, and associated multisector care coordination to improve health outcomes and equity for vulnerable and marginalized patient populations.

Evaluating the association of social needs assessment data with cardiometabolic health status in a federally qualified community health center patient population.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are increasingly using standardized social needs screening and response protocols including the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients' Risks, Assets, and Experiences (PRAPARE) to improve population health and equity; despite established relationships between the social determinants of health and health outcomes, little is known about the associations between standardized social needs assessment information and patients' clinical condition. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we examined the relationship between social needs screening assessment data and measures of cardiometabolic clinical health from electronic health records data using two modelling approaches: a backward stepwise logistic regression and a least absolute selection and shrinkage operation (LASSO) logistic regression. Primary outcomes were dichotomized cardiometabolic measures related to obesity, hypertension, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) 10-year risk. Nested models were built to evaluate the utility of social needs assessment data from PRAPARE for risk prediction, stratification, and population health management. RESULTS: Social needs related to lack of housing, unemployment, stress, access to medicine or health care, and inability to afford phone service were consistently associated with cardiometabolic risk across models. Model fit, as measured by the c-statistic, was poor for predicting obesity (logistic = 0.586; LASSO = 0.587), moderate for stage 1 hypertension (logistic = 0.703; LASSO = 0.688), and high for borderline ASCVD risk (logistic = 0.954; LASSO = 0.950). CONCLUSIONS: Associations between social needs assessment data and clinical outcomes vary by cardiometabolic condition. Social needs assessment data may be useful for prospectively identifying patients at heightened cardiometabolic risk; however, there are limits to the utility of social needs data for improving predictive performance.

Chronic disease stigma, skepticism of the health system, and socio-economic fragility: Qualitative assessment of factors impacting receptiveness to group medical visits and microfinance for non-communicable disease care in rural Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of mortality in the world, and innovative approaches to NCD care delivery are being actively developed and evaluated. Combining the group-based experience of microfinance and group medical visits is a novel approach to NCD care delivery. However, the contextual factors, facilitators, and barriers impacting wide-scale implementation of these approaches within a low- and middle-income country setting are not well known. METHODS: Two types of qualitative group discussion were conducted: 1) mabaraza (singular, baraza), a traditional East African community gathering used to discuss and exchange information in large group settings; and 2) focus group discussions (FGDs) among rural clinicians, community health workers, microfinance group members, and patients with NCDs. Trained research staff members led the discussions using structured question guides. Content analysis was performed with NVivo using deductive and inductive codes that were then grouped into themes. RESULTS: We conducted 5 mabaraza and 16 FGDs. A total of 205 individuals (113 men and 92 women) participated in the mabaraza, while 162 individuals (57 men and 105 women) participated in the FGDs. In the context of poverty and previous experiences with the health system, participants described challenges to NCD care across three themes: 1) stigma of chronic disease, 2) earned skepticism of the health system, and 3) socio-economic fragility. However, they also outlined windows of opportunity and facilitators of group medical visits and microfinance to address those challenges. DISCUSSION: Our qualitative study revealed actionable factors that could impact the success of implementation of group medical visits and microfinance initiatives for NCD care. While several challenges were highlighted, participants also described opportunities to address and mitigate the impact of these factors. We anticipate that our approach and analysis provides new insights and methodological techniques that will be relevant to other low-resource settings worldwide.

Utilization and Costs by Primary Care Provider Type: Are There Differences Among Diabetic Patients of Physicians, Nurse Practitioners, and Physician Assistants?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs among diabetes patients with physician, nurse practitioner (NP), or physician assistant (PA) primary care providers (PCPs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Cohort study using Veterans Affairs (VA) electronic health record data to examine the relationship between PCP type and utilization and costs over 1 year in 368,481 adult, diabetes patients. Relationship between PCP type and utilization and costs in 2013 was examined with extensive adjustment for patient and facility characteristics. Emergency department and outpatient analyses used negative binomial models; hospitalizations used logistic regression. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models. RESULTS: PCPs were physicians, NPs, and PAs for 74.9% (n=276,009), 18.2% (n=67,120), and 6.9% (n=25,352) of patients respectively. Patients of NPs and PAs have lower odds of inpatient admission [odds ratio for NP vs. physician 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87-0.93; PA vs. physician 0.92, 95% CI=0.87-0.97], and lower emergency department use (0.67 visits on average for physicians, 95% CI=0.65-0.68; 0.60 for NPs, 95% CI=0.58-0.63; 0.59 for PAs, 95% CI=0.56-0.63). This translates into NPs and PAs having ~$500-$700 less health care costs per patient per year (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Expanded use of NPs and PAs in the PCP role for some patients may be associated with notable cost savings. In our cohort, substituting care patterns and creating similar clinical situations in which they practice, NPs and PAs may have reduced costs of care by up to 150-190 million dollars in 2013.

Impact Of Physicians, Nurse Practitioners, And Physician Assistants On Utilization And Costs For Complex Patients.

Because of workforce needs and demographic and chronic disease trends, nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) are taking a larger role in the primary care of medically complex patients with chronic conditions. Research shows good quality outcomes, but concerns persist that NPs' and PAs' care of vulnerable populations could increase care costs compared to the traditional physician-dominated system. We used 2012-13 Veterans Affairs data on a cohort of medically complex patients with diabetes to compare health services use and costs depending on whether the primary care provider was a physician, NP, or PA. Case-mix-adjusted total care costs were 6-7 percent lower for NP and PA patients than for physician patients, driven by more use of emergency and inpatient services by the latter. We found that use of NPs and PAs as primary care providers for complex patients with diabetes was associated with less use of acute care services and lower total costs.

Survival among Veterans Obtaining Dialysis in VA and Non-VA Settings.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of veterans with ESRD may differ depending on where they receive dialysis and who finances this care, but little is known about variation in outcomes across different dialysis settings and financial arrangements. METHODS: We examined survival among 27,241 Veterans Affairs (VA)-enrolled veterans who initiated chronic dialysis in 2008-2011 at (1) VA-based units, (2) community-based clinics through the Veterans Affairs Purchased Care program (VA-PC), (3) community-based clinics under Medicare, or (4) more than one of these settings ("dual" care). Using a Cox proportional hazards model, we compared all-cause mortality across dialysis settings during the 2-year period after dialysis initiation, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 4% of patients received dialysis in VA, 11% under VA-PC, 67% under Medicare, and 18% in dual settings (nearly half receiving dual VA and VA-PC dialysis). Crude 2-year mortality was 25% for veterans receiving dialysis in the VA, 30% under VA-PC, 42% under Medicare, and 23% in dual settings. After adjustment, dialysis patients in VA or in dual settings had significantly lower 2-year mortality than those under Medicare; mortality did not differ in VA-PC and Medicare dialysis settings. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality rates were highest for veterans receiving dialysis in Medicare or VA-PC settings and lowest for veterans receiving dialysis in the VA or dual settings. These findings inform institutional decisions about provision of dialysis for veterans. Further research identifying processes associated with improved survival for patients receiving VA-based dialysis may be useful in establishing best practices for outsourced veteran care.

Comparative Assessment of Utilization and Hospital Outcomes of Veterans Receiving VA and Non-VA Outpatient Dialysis.

OBJECTIVE: Growing demand for VA dialysis exceeds its supply and travel distances prohibit many Veterans from receiving dialysis in a VA facility, leading to increased use of dialysis from non-VA providers. This study compared utilization and hospitalization outcomes among Veterans receiving chronic dialysis in VA and non-VA settings in 2008-2013. DATA SOURCES: VA, Medicare, and national disease registry data. STUDY DESIGN: National cohort of 27,301 Veterans initiating dialysis, observed for a period of 2 years after treatment initiation. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine associations between patient characteristics and dialysis use in VA, non-VA community settings via VA Purchased Care (VA-PC), community settings via Medicare, or Dual settings. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression was used to compare risk of hospitalization and days spent in the hospital across dialysis settings. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Sixty-seven percent of Veterans obtained community-based dialysis exclusively via Medicare, 11 percent in the community via VA-PC, 4 percent in VA, and 18 percent in Dual settings. Financial and geographic access factors were important predictors of dialysis setting, but days spent in the hospital and risk of hospitalization did not differ meaningfully across settings. CONCLUSIONS: Most Veterans obtained dialysis in the community. Dialysis setting appeared to have little impact on risk of hospitalization among Veterans.

How Views of the Organization of Primary Care Among Patients with Hypertension Vary by Race or Ethnicity.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed potential racial or ethnic differences in the degree to which veterans with pharmaceutically treated hypertension report experiences with their primary care system that are consistent with optimal chronic illness care as suggested by Wagner's Chronic Care Model (CCM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of the results of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC), which measured components of the care system suggested by the CCM and was completed at baseline by participants in a hypertension disease management clinical trial. Participants had a recent history of uncontrolled systolic blood pressure. RESULTS: Among 377 patients, non-Hispanic African American veterans had almost twice the odds of indicating that their primary care experience is consistent with CCM features when compared with non-Hispanic White patients (odds ratio (OR) = 1.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.16-2.98). Similar statistically significant associations were observed for follow-up care (OR = 2.59; 95% CI = 1.49-4.50), patient activation (OR = 1.80; 95% CI = 1.13-2.87), goal setting (OR = 1.65; 95% CI = 1.03-2.64), and help with problem solving (OR = 1.62; 95% CI = 1.00-2.60). CONCLUSIONS: Non-Hispanic African Americans with pharmaceutically treated hypertension report that the primary care system more closely approximates the Wagner CCM than non-Hispanic White patients.

A survey of current state of training of plastic surgery residents.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgery training is undergoing major changes however there is paucity of data detailing the current state of training as perceived by plastic surgical trainees. Our aim was to determine the quality of training as perceived by the current trainee pool and their future plans. METHODS: A 25-item anonymous survey with three discrete sections (demographics, quality of training, and post-graduate career plans) was developed and distributed to plastic surgery residents during the academic year 2013. With the confidence interval of 95% and margin of error of 10%, our target response rate was 87 responders. RESULTS: We received a total of 114 respondents with all levels of Post Graduate Year in training represented. Upon comparison of residents with debt of <100,000 to residents with a debt of >250,000, those with higher debt were significantly less interested in fellowship training (p value 0.05) and were more likely to pursue private practice (p value <0.01). Disciplines within plastic surgery least offered as a separate rotation were microsurgery (45%) followed by aesthetic surgery (33%). 53.7% of the residents felt that they were least trained in aesthetic surgery followed by burn surgery 45.4%. Of note 56.4% intended to seek additional training after residency. Moreover residents with an average of 6.4 months of experience in an individual subspecialty were more likely to feel comfortable with that specialty. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights the areas and subspecialties that deserve attention as perceived by the current trainee pool.

Bridging Income Generation with Group Integrated Care for cardiovascular risk reduction: Rationale and design of the BIGPIC study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, with >80% of CVD deaths occurring in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Diabetes mellitus and pre-diabetes are risk factors for CVD, and CVD is the major cause of morbidity and mortality among individuals with DM. There is a critical period now during which reducing CVD risk among individuals with diabetes and pre-diabetes may have a major impact. Cost-effective, culturally appropriate, and context-specific approaches are required. Two promising strategies to improve health outcomes are group medical visits and microfinance. METHODS/DESIGN: This study tests whether group medical visits integrated into microfinance groups are effective and cost-effective in reducing CVD risk among individuals with diabetes or at increased risk for diabetes in western Kenya. An initial phase of qualitative inquiry will assess contextual factors, facilitators, and barriers that may impact integration of group medical visits and microfinance for CVD risk reduction. Subsequently, we will conduct a four-arm cluster randomized trial comparing: (1) usual clinical care, (2) usual clinical care plus microfinance groups only, (3) group medical visits only, and (4) group medical visits integrated into microfinance groups. The primary outcome measure will be 1-year change in systolic blood pressure, and a key secondary outcome measure is 1-year change in overall CVD risk as measured by the QRISK2 score. We will conduct mediation analysis to evaluate the influence of changes in social network characteristics on intervention outcomes, as well as moderation analysis to evaluate the influence of baseline social network characteristics on effectiveness of the interventions. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted in terms of cost per unit change in systolic blood pressure, percent change in CVD risk score, and per disability-adjusted life year saved. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence regarding effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce CVD risk. We aim to produce generalizable methods and results that can provide a model for adoption in low-resource settings worldwide.

Jump starting shared medical appointments for diabetes with weight management: Rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Rates of glycemic control remain suboptimal nationwide. Medication intensification for diabetes can have undesirable side effects (weight gain, hypoglycemia), which offset the benefits of glycemic control. A Shared Medical Appointment (SMA) intervention for diabetes that emphasizes weight management could improve glycemic outcomes and reduce weight while simultaneously lowering diabetes medication needs, resulting in less hypoglycemia and better quality of life. We describe the rationale and design for a study evaluating a novel SMA intervention for diabetes that primarily emphasizes low-carbohydrate diet-focused weight management. METHODS: Jump Starting Shared Medical Appointments for Diabetes with Weight Management (Jump Start) is a randomized, controlled trial that is allocating overweight Veterans (body mass index≥27kg/m2) with type 2 diabetes into two arms: 1) a traditional SMA group focusing on medication management and self-management counseling; or 2) an SMA group that combines low-carbohydrate diet-focused weight management (WM/SMA) with medication management. Hemoglobin A1c reduction at 48weeks is the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include hypoglycemic events, diabetes medication use, weight, medication adherence, diabetes-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. We hypothesize that WM/SMA will be non-inferior to standard SMA for glycemic control, and will reduce hypoglycemia, diabetes medication use, and weight relative to standard SMA, while also improving quality of life and costs. CONCLUSIONS: Jump Start targets two common problems that are closely related but infrequently managed together: diabetes and obesity. By focusing on diet and weight loss as the primary means to control diabetes, this intervention may improve several meaningful patient-centered outcomes related to diabetes.

Open-label randomized trial of titrated disease management for patients with hypertension: Study design and baseline sample characteristics.

Despite the availability of efficacious treatments, only half of patients with hypertension achieve adequate blood pressure (BP) control. This paper describes the protocol and baseline subject characteristics of a 2-arm, 18-month randomized clinical trial of titrated disease management (TDM) for patients with pharmaceutically-treated hypertension for whom systolic blood pressure (SBP) is not controlled (≥140mmHg for non-diabetic or ≥130mmHg for diabetic patients). The trial is being conducted among patients of four clinic locations associated with a Veterans Affairs Medical Center. An intervention arm has a TDM strategy in which patients' hypertension control at baseline, 6, and 12months determines the resource intensity of disease management. Intensity levels include: a low-intensity strategy utilizing a licensed practical nurse to provide bi-monthly, non-tailored behavioral support calls to patients whose SBP comes under control; medium-intensity strategy utilizing a registered nurse to provide monthly tailored behavioral support telephone calls plus home BP monitoring; and high-intensity strategy utilizing a pharmacist to provide monthly tailored behavioral support telephone calls, home BP monitoring, and pharmacist-directed medication management. Control arm patients receive the low-intensity strategy regardless of BP control. The primary outcome is SBP. There are 385 randomized (192 intervention; 193 control) veterans that are predominately older (mean age 63.5years) men (92.5%). 61.8% are African American, and the mean baseline SBP for all subjects is 143.6mmHg. This trial will determine if a disease management program that is titrated by matching the intensity of resources to patients' BP control leads to superior outcomes compared to a low-intensity management strategy.

Practical Telemedicine for Veterans with Persistently Poor Diabetes Control: A Randomized Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine-based diabetes management improves outcomes versus clinic care but is seldom implemented by healthcare systems. In order to advance telemedicine-based management as a practical option for veterans with persistent poorly controlled diabetes mellitus (PPDM) despite clinic-based care, we evaluated a comprehensive telemedicine intervention that we specifically designed for delivery using existing Veterans Health Administration (VHA) clinical staffing and equipment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 6-month randomized trial among 50 veterans with PPDM; all maintained hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels continuously >9.0% for >1 year despite clinic-based management. Participants received usual care or a telemedicine intervention combining telemonitoring, medication management, self-management support, and depression management; existing VHA clinical staff delivered the intervention. Using linear mixed models, we examined HbA1c, diabetes self-care (measured by the Self-Care Inventory-Revised questionnaire), depression, and blood pressure. RESULTS: At baseline, the model-estimated common HbA1c intercept was 10.5%. By 6 months, estimated HbA1c had improved by 1.3% for intervention participants and 0.3% for usual care (estimated difference, -1.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.0%, 0.0%; p = 0.050). Intervention participants' diabetes self-care (estimated difference, 7.0; 95% CI, 0.1, 14.0; p = 0.047), systolic blood pressure (-7.7 mm Hg; 95% CI, -14.8, -0.6; p = 0.035), and diastolic blood pressure (-5.6 mm Hg; 95% CI, -9.9, -1.2; p = 0.013) were improved versus usual care by 6 months. Depressive symptoms were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive telemedicine intervention improved outcomes among veterans with PPDM despite clinic-based care. Because we specifically designed this intervention with scalability in mind, it may represent a practical, real-world strategy to reduce the burden of poor diabetes control among veterans.

Group Versus Individual Physical Therapy for Veterans With Knee Osteoarthritis: Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Efficient approaches are needed for delivering nonpharmacological interventions for management of knee osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: This trial compared group-based versus individual physical therapy interventions for management of knee OA. DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred twenty patients with knee OA at the VA Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina, (mean age=60 years, 88% male, 58% nonwhite) were randomly assigned to receive either the group intervention (group physical therapy; six 1-hour sessions, typically 8 participants per group) or the individual intervention (individual physical therapy; two 1-hour sessions). Both programs included instruction in home exercise, joint protection techniques, and individual physical therapist evaluation. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC; range=0-96, higher scores indicate worse symptoms), measured at baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks. The secondary outcome measure was the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; range=0-12, higher scores indicate better performance), measured at baseline and 12 weeks. Linear mixed models assessed the difference in WOMAC scores between arms. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, WOMAC scores were 2.7 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% confidence interval [CI]=-5.9, 0.5; P=.10), indicating no between-group difference. At 24 weeks, WOMAC scores were 1.3 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% CI=-4.6, 2.0; P=.44), indicating no significant between-group difference. At 12 weeks, SPPB scores were 0.1 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% CI=-0.5, 0.2; P=.53), indicating no difference between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted in one VA medical center. Outcome assessors were blinded, but participants and physical therapists were not blinded. CONCLUSIONS: Group physical therapy was not more effective than individual physical therapy for primary and secondary study outcomes. Either group physical therapy or individual physical therapy may be a reasonable delivery model for health care systems to consider.

Long-term outcomes of analogue insulin compared with NPH for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting insulin analogues (eg, insulin glargine and insulin detemir) are an alternative to neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin for maintaining glycemic control in patients with diabetes. Clinical trials comparing analogue insulin and NPH have neither been adequately powered nor had sufficient follow-up to examine long-term health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of NPH and long-acting insulin analogues on long-term outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective observational study relied on administrative data from the Veterans Health Administration and Medicare from 2000 to 2010. Local variations in analogue insulin prescribing rates were used in instrumental variable models to control for confounding. Outcomes were assessed using survival models. METHODS: The study population included US veterans dually enrolled in Medicare who received at least 1 prescription for oral diabetes medication and then initiated long-acting insulin between 2001 and 2009. Outcomes included ambulatory care-sensitive condition (ACSC) hospitalizations and mortality. RESULTS: There was no significant relationship between type of insulin and ACSC hospitalization or mortality. The hazard ratio for mortality of individuals starting a long-acting analogue insulin was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.85-1.11), and was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.95-1.16) for ACSC hospitalization. Differences in risk remained insignificant when predicting diabetes-specific ACSC hospitalizations, but starting on long-acting analogue insulin significantly increased the risk of a cardiovascular-specific ACSC hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: We found no consistent difference in long-term health outcomes when comparing use of long-acting insulin analogues and NPH insulin. The higher cost of analogue insulin without demonstrable clinical benefit raises questions of its cost-effectiveness in the treatment of patients with diabetes.

An automated system for video documentation of all instances of fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery training: feasibility and potential advantages of extended assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Documentation of the acquisition of surgical skills is mandated during and after training. Assessment-driven feedback interspersed during Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) training is expected to improve the quality of practice and increase skill acquisition. But the direct observation of FLS task performance by experts required to form this feedback is not feasible because of staffing and cost limits. Video recordings can reproduce a display of FLS task performance identical to the original camera view and can provide the critical observations needed for FLS assessment. METHODS: We report the design and operation of an automated system for the capture of digital video clips of all FLS practice trials and for the support of remote, distributed assessments. RESULTS: Advantages included permanent documentation of performance, quality controlled assessment by non-Medical Doctor personnel, accurate quantification of practice frequency, and emergence of new observations on patterns of intermediate skill development. The completeness and accuracy of the dataset support analyses of group learning rates and lay the foundation for scientific training curriculum development. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that video documentation of FLS training is feasible and worthwhile.

Shared medical appointments for patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Shared medical appointments (SMAs) are an increasingly used system-redesign strategy for improving access to and quality of chronic illness care. We conducted a systematic review of the existing literature on SMA interventions for patients with diabetes in order to understand their impact on outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from January 1996 through April 2012. PubMed search updated June 2013. STUDY SELECTION: English-language peer-reviewed publications of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomized cluster controlled trials, controlled before-and-after studies, or interrupted time-series designs conducted among adult patients with diabetes. Two independent reviewers used prespecified criteria to screen titles and abstracts for full text review. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Two different reviewers abstracted data and rated study quality and strength of evidence. When possible, we used random-effects models to synthesize the effects quantitatively, reporting by a weighted difference of the means when the same scale was used across studies, and a standardized mean difference when the scales differed. We measured heterogeneity in study effects using Forest Plots, Cochran's Q, and I(2), and explored heterogeneity by using subgroup analyses for categorical variables and meta-regression analyses for continuous or discrete variables. Outcomes not suitable to meta-analysis were summarized qualitatively. RESULTS: Twenty-five articles representing 17 unique studies compared SMA interventions with usual care. Among patients with diabetes, SMAs improved hemoglobin A1c (∆ = -0.55 percentage points [95 % CI, -0.11 to -0.99]); improved systolic blood pressure (∆ = -5.2 mmHg [95 % CI, -3.0 to -7.4]); and did not improve LDL cholesterol (∆ = -6.6 mg/dl [95 % CI, 2.8 to -16.1]). Nonbiophysical outcomes, including economic outcomes, were reported too infrequently to meta-analyze, or to draw conclusions from. The A1c result had significant heterogeneity among studies, likely secondary to the heterogeneity among included SMA interventions. LIMITATION: Heterogeneity among the components of diabetes SMAs leads to uncertainty about what makes a particular SMA successful. CONCLUSION: SMA interventions improve biophysical outcomes among patients with diabetes. There was inadequate literature to determine SMA effects on patient experience, utilization, and costs.

Capitalizing on prescribing pattern variation to compare medications for type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials often compare hypoglycemic medications on the basis of glycemic control but do not examine long-term outcomes (e.g., mortality). This study demonstrates an alternative approach to lengthening clinical trials to assess these long-term outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To use observational quasi-experimental methods using instrumental variables (IVs) to compare the effect of two hypoglycemic medications, sulfonylureas (SUs) and thiazolidinediones (TZDs), on long-term outcomes. METHODS: This study used administrative data from the Veterans Health Administration and Medicare from 2000 to 2010. The study population included US veterans dually enrolled in Medicare who received a prescription for metformin and then initiated SUs or TZDs. Patients could either continue on or discontinue metformin after the initiation of the second agent. Treatment was defined as starting either a SU or a TZD. Local variations in SU prescribing rates were used as instruments in IV models to control for selection bias. Survival models predicted all-cause mortality, ambulatory care sensitive condition hospitalizations, and stroke or heart attack (acute myocardial infarction). RESULTS: Starting on SUs compared to TZDs significantly increased the likelihood of experiencing mortality and ACSC hospitalization. The estimated hazard ratio for the effect of starting on SUs compared to TZDs was 1.50 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-2.09) for all-cause mortality, 1.68 (95% CI 1.31-2.15) for ambulatory care sensitive condition hospitalization, and 1.15 (95% CI 0.80-1.66) for acute myocardial infarction or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest increased risk of major adverse events associated with SUs as a second-line agent. Quasi-experimental IV methods may be an important alternative to lengthening clinical trials to assess long-term outcomes.