Implementation of a virtual community of practice to promote the empowerment of middle-aged people with multimorbidity: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Empowering people living with multimorbidity (multiple chronic conditions) to gain greater confidence in managing their health can enhance their quality of life. Education focused on self-management is a key tool for fostering patient empowerment and is mostly provided on an individual basis. Virtual communities of practice (VCoP) present a unique opportunity for online education in chronic condition self-management within a social context. This research aims to evaluate the effectiveness/cost-effectiveness of individualised, online self-management education compared with VCoP among middle-aged individuals living with multiple chronic conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: People aged 30-60, living with ≥2 chronic conditions and receiving care in primary care (PC) centres and outpatient hospital-based clinics in Madrid and Canary Islands will enrol in an 18-month parallel-design, blinded (intervention assessment and data analysts), pragmatic (adhering to the intention-to-treat principle), individually randomised trial. The trial will compare two 12-month web-based educational offers of identical content; one delivered individually (control) and the other with online social interaction (VCoP, intervention). Using repeated measures mixed linear models, with the patient as random effect and allocation groups and time per group as fixed effects, we will estimate between-arm differences in the change in Patient Activation Measure from baseline to 12 months (primary endpoint), including measurements at 6-month and 18-month follow-up. Other outcomes will include measures of depression and anxiety, treatment burden, quality of life. In addition to a process evaluation of the VCoP, we will conduct an economic evaluation estimating the relative cost-effectiveness of the VCoP from the perspectives of both the National Health System and the Community. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by Clinical Research Ethics Committees of Gregorio Marañón University Hospital in Madrid/Nuestra Señora Candelaria University Hospital in Santa Cruz de Tenerife. The results will be disseminated through workshops, policy briefs, peer-reviewed publications and local/international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06046326.

Developing and validating the Unhurried Conversations Assessment Tool (UCAT).

OBJECTIVE: Given the importance of unhurried conversations for providing careful and kind care, we sought to create, test, and validate the Unhurried Conversations Assessment Tool (UCAT) for assessing the unhurriedness of patient-clinician consultations. METHODS: In the first two phases, the unhurried conversation dimensions were identified and transformed into an assessment tool. In the third phase, two independent raters used UCAT to evaluate the unhurriedness of 100 randomly selected consultations from 184 videos recorded for a large research trial. UCAT's psychometric properties were evaluated using this data. RESULTS: UCAT demonstrates content validity based on the literature and expert review. EFA and reliability analyses confirm its construct validity and internal consistency. The seven formative dimensions account for 89.93% of the variance in unhurriedness, each displaying excellent internal consistency (α > 0.90). Inter-rater agreement for the overall assessment item was fair (ICC = 0.59), with individual dimension ICCs ranging from 0.26 (poor) to 0.95 (excellent). CONCLUSION: UCAT components comprehensively assess the unhurriedness of consultations. The tool exhibits content and construct validity and can be used reliably. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: UCAT's design and psychometric properties make it a practical and efficient tool. Clinicians can use it for self-evaluations and training to foster unhurried conversations.

Telemedicine and the assessment of clinician time: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Telemedicine may improve healthcare access and efficiency if it demands less clinician time than usual care. We sought to describe the degree to which telemedicine trials assess the effect of telemedicine on clinicians' time and to discuss how including the time needed to treat (TNT) in health technology assessment (HTA) could affect the design of telemedicine services and studies. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching clinicaltrials.gov using the search term "telemedicine" and limiting results to randomized trials or observational studies registered between January 2012 and October 2023. We then reviewed trial registration data to determine if any of the outcomes assessed in the trials measured effect on clinicians' time. RESULTS: We found 113 studies and of these 78 studies of telemedicine met the inclusion criteria and were included. Nine (12 percent) of the 78 studies had some measure of clinician time as a primary outcome, and 11 (14 percent) as a secondary outcome. Four studies compared direct measures of TNT with telemedicine versus usual care, but no statistically significant difference was found. Of the sixteen studies including indirect measures of clinician time, thirteen found no significant effects, two found a statistically significant reduction, and one found a statistically significant increase. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review found that clinician time is not commonly measured in studies of telemedicine interventions. Attention to telemedicine's TNT in clinical studies and HTAs of telemedicine in practice may bring attention to the organization of clinical workflows and increase the value of telemedicine.

The development and initial feasibility testing of D-HOMES: a behavioral activation-based intervention for diabetes medication adherence and psychological wellness among people experiencing homelessness.

Introduction: Compared to stably housed peers, people experiencing homelessness (PEH) have lower rates of ideal glycemic control, and experience premature morbidity and mortality. High rates of behavioral health comorbidities and trauma add to access barriers driving poor outcomes. Limited evidence guides behavioral approaches to support the needs of PEH with diabetes. Lay coaching models can improve care for low-resource populations with diabetes, yet we found no evidence of programs specifically tailored to the needs of PEH. Methods: We used a multistep, iterative process following the ORBIT model to develop the Diabetes Homeless Medication Support (D-HOMES) program, a new lifestyle intervention for PEH with type 2 diabetes. We built a community-engaged research team who participated in all of the following steps of treatment development: (1) initial treatment conceptualization drawing from evidence-based programs, (2) qualitative interviews with affected people and multi-disciplinary housing and healthcare providers, and (3) an open trial of D-HOMES to evaluate acceptability (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, exit interview) and treatment engagement (completion rate of up to 10 offered coaching sessions). Results: In step (1), the D-HOMES treatment manual drew from existing behavioral activation and lay health coach programs for diabetes as well as clinical resources from Health Care for the Homeless. Step (2) qualitative interviews (n = 26 patients, n = 21 providers) shaped counseling approaches, language and choices regarding interventionists, tools, and resources. PTSD symptoms were reported in 69% of patients. Step (3) trial participants (N = 10) overall found the program acceptable, however, we saw better program satisfaction and treatment engagement among more stably housed people. We developed adapted treatment materials for the target population and refined recruitment/retention strategies and trial procedures sensitive to prevalent discrimination and racism to better retain people of color and those with less stable housing. Discussion: The research team has used these findings to inform an NIH-funded randomized control pilot trial. We found synergy between community-engaged research and the ORBIT model of behavioral treatment development to develop a new intervention designed for PEH with type 2 diabetes and address health equity gaps in people who have experienced trauma. We conclude that more work and different approaches are needed to address the needs of participants with the least stable housing.

Does the duration of ambulatory consultations affect the quality of healthcare? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The objective is to examine and synthesise the best available experimental evidence about the effect of ambulatory consultation duration on quality of healthcare. METHODS: We included experimental studies manipulating the length of outpatient clinical encounters between adult patients and clinicians (ie, therapists, pharmacists, nurses, physicians) to determine their effect on quality of care (ie, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, safety, equity, patient-centredness and patient satisfaction). INFORMATION SOURCES: Using controlled vocabulary and keywords, without restriction by language or year of publication, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews and Scopus from inception until 15 May 2023. RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane Risk of Bias instrument. DATA SYNTHESIS: Narrative synthesis. RESULTS: 11 publications of 10 studies explored the relationship between encounter duration and quality. Most took place in the UK's general practice over two decades ago. Study findings based on very sparse and outdated evidence-which suggested that longer consultations improved indicators of patient-centred care, education about prevention and clinical referrals; and that consultation duration was inconsistently related to patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes-warrant low confidence due to limited protections against bias and indirect applicability to current practice. CONCLUSION: Experimental evidence for a minimal or optimal duration of an outpatient consultation is sparse and outdated. To develop evidence-based policies and practices about encounter length, randomised trials of different consultation lengths-in person and virtually, and with electronic health records-are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: OSF Registration DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/EUDK8.

Cost Conversations About Anticoagulation Between Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Their Clinicians: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: How patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and their clinicians consider cost in forming care plans remains unknown. Objective: To identify factors that inform conversations regarding costs of anticoagulants for treatment of AF between patients and clinicians and outcomes associated with these conversations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of recorded encounters and participant surveys at 5 US medical centers (including academic, community, and safety-net centers) from the SDM4AFib randomized trial compared standard AF care with and without use of a shared decision-making (SDM) tool. Included patients were considering anticoagulation treatment and were recruited by their clinicians between January 30, 2017, and June 27, 2019. Data were analyzed between August and November 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of and factors associated with cost conversations, and the association of cost conversations with patients' consideration of treatment cost burden and their choice of anticoagulation. Results: A total of 830 encounters (out of 922 enrolled participants) were recorded. Patients' mean (SD) age was 71.0 (10.4) years; 511 patients (61.6%) were men, 704 (86.0%) were White, 303 (40.9%) earned between $40 000 and $99 999 in annual income, and 657 (79.2%) were receiving anticoagulants. Clinicians' mean (SD) age was 44.8 (13.2) years; 75 clinicians (53.2%) were men, and 111 (76%) practiced as physicians, with approximately half (69 [48.9%]) specializing in either internal medicine or cardiology. Cost conversations occurred in 639 encounters (77.0%) and were more likely in the SDM arm (378 [90%] vs 261 [64%]; OR, 9.69; 95% CI, 5.77-16.29). In multivariable analysis, cost conversations were more likely to occur with female clinicians (66 [47%]; OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.21-6.71); consultants vs in-training clinicians (113 [75%]; OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.4-11.1); clinicians practicing family medicine (24 [16%]; OR, 12.12; 95% CI, 2.75-53.38]), internal medicine (35 [23%]; OR, 3.82; 95% CI, 1.25-11.70), or other clinicians (21 [14%]; OR, 4.90; 95% CI, 1.32-18.16) when compared with cardiologists; and for patients with an annual household income between $40 000 and $99 999 (249 [82.2%]; OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.05-3.29) compared with income below $40 000 or above $99 999. More patients who had cost conversations reported cost as a factor in their decision (244 [89.1%] vs 327 [69.0%]; OR 3.66; 95% CI, 2.43-5.50), but cost conversations were not associated with the choice of anticoagulation agent. Conclusions and Relevance: Cost conversations were common, particularly for middle-income patients and with female and consultant-level primary care clinicians, as well as in encounters using an SDM tool; they were associated with patients' consideration of treatment cost burden but not final treatment choice. With increasing costs of care passed on to patients, these findings can inform efforts to promote cost conversations in practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02905032.

Comparison of Diabetes Medications Used by Adults With Commercial Insurance vs Medicare Advantage, 2016 to 2019.

Importance: Glucagonlike peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) are associated with low rates of hypoglycemia, and postmarketing trials of GLP-1RA and SGLT2i demonstrated that these medications improved cardiovascular and kidney outcomes. Objective: To compare trends in initiation of treatment with GLP-1RA, SGLT2i, and DPP-4i by older adults with type 2 diabetes insured by Medicare Advantage vs commercial health plans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used administrative claims data from a deidentified database of commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Adults aged 58 to 66 years with type 2 diabetes who filled any medication prescription to lower glucose levels from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019, were compared between groups. Exposure: Enrollment in a Medicare Advantage or commercial health insurance plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: The odds of initiating GLP-1RA, SGLT2i, and DPP-4i treatment were examined for Medicare Advantage vs commercial insurance beneficiaries using 3 separate logistic regression models adjusted for year and demographic and clinical factors. These models were used to calculate adjusted annual rates of medication initiation by health plan. Results: A total of 382 574 adults with pharmacologically treated type 2 diabetes (52.9% men; mean [SD] age, 62.4 [2.7] years) were identified, including 172 180 Medicare Advantage and 210 394 commercial beneficiaries. From 2016 to 2019, adjusted rates of initiation of GLP-1RA, SGLT2i, and DPP-4i treatment increased among all beneficiaries, from 2.14% to 20.02% for GLP-1RA among commercial insurance beneficiaries and from 1.50% to 11.44% among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries; from 2.74% to 18.15% for SGLT2i among commercial insurance beneficiaries and from 1.57% to 8.51% among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries; and from 3.30% to 11.71% for DPP-4i among commercial insurance beneficiaries and from 2.44% to 7.68% among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Initiation rates for all 3 drug classes were consistently lower among Medicare Advantage than among commercial insurance beneficiaries. Within each calendar year, the odds of initiating GLP-1RA treatment ranged from 0.28 (95% CI, 0.26-0.29) to 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65-0.75) for Medicare Advantage and commercial insurance beneficiaries, respectively; SGLT2i, from 0.21 (95% CI, 0.20-0.22) to 0.57 (95% CI, 0.53-0.61), respectively; and DPP-4i, from 0.37 (95% CI, 0.34-0.39) to 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.78), respectively (P < .001 for all). The odds of starting GLP-1RA and SGLT2i increased with income; for an income of $200 000 and higher vs less than $40 000, the odds ratio for GLP-1RA was 1.23 (95% CI, 1.15-1.32) and for SGLT2i was 1.16 (95% CI, 1.09-1.24). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries may be less likely than commercially insured beneficiaries to be treated with newer medications to lower glucose levels, with greater disparities among lower-income patients. Better understanding of nonclinical factors contributing to treatment decisions and efforts to promote greater equity in diabetes management appear to be needed.

The validity of cost-effectiveness analyses of tight glycemic control. A systematic survey of economic evaluations of pharmacological interventions in patients with type 2 diabetes.

PURPOSE: Currently available randomized trial evidence has shown no reductions in type 2 diabetes (T2D) complications important to patients with tight glycemic control. Yet, economic analyses consistently find tight glycemic control to be cost-effective. To understand this apparent paradox, we systematically identified and appraised economic analyses of tight glycemic control for T2D. METHODS: We searched multiple databases from January 2016 to January 2018 for cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses of any glucose-lowering treatments for adults with T2D using simulations with long-40 years to lifetime-time horizons. Reviewers selected and appraised each study independently and in duplicate with good reproducibility. RESULTS: We found 30 analyses, most comparing the glycemic impact of glucose-lowering drugs and applying their impact on HbA1c to model (most commonly IMS CORE or Cardiff T2DM) their impact on the incidence of diabetes-related complication. Models drew from observational evidence of the correlation of HbA1c levels and diabetes-related complication rates; none used estimates of the effect of lowering HbA1c on these outcomes from systematic reviews of randomized trials. Sensitivity analyses, when conducted, demonstrate substantial loss of cost-effectiveness as simulations approach the results seen in these trials. CONCLUSIONS: Reliance on the association between glycemic control and diabetes-related complications evident in observational studies but not apparent in randomized trial bias the estimates of the cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve glycemic control.

The burden of treatment in people living with type 2 diabetes: A qualitative study of patients and their primary care clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The burden of treatment can overwhelm people living with type 2 diabetes and lead to poor treatment fidelity and outcomes. Chronic care programs must consider and mitigate the burden of treatment while supporting patients in achieving their goals. OBJECTIVE: To explore what patients with type 2 diabetes and their health providers consider are the workload and the resources they must mobilize, i.e., their capacity, to shoulder it. METHODS: We conducted focus groups comprised of 30 patients and 32 clinicians from three community health centers in Chile implementing the Chronic Care Model to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic content analysis techniques illuminated by the Minimally Disruptive Medicine framework. FINDINGS: Gaining access to and working with their clinicians, implementing complex medication regimens, and changing lifestyles burdened patients. To deal with the distress of the diagnosis, difficulties achieving disease control, and fear of complications, patients drew capacity from their family (mostly men), social environment (mostly women), lay expertise, and spirituality. Clinicians found that administrative tasks, limited formulary, and protocol rigidity hindered their ability to modify care plans to reduce patient workload and support their capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic primary care programs burden patients living with type 2 diabetes while hindering clinicians' ability to reduce treatment workloads or support patient capacity. A collaborative approach toward Minimally Disruptive Medicine may result in treatments that fit the lives and loves of patients and improve outcomes.

Assessment of Shared Decision-making for Stroke Prevention in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Shared decision-making (SDM) about anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is widely recommended but its effectiveness is unclear. Objective: To assess the extent to which the use of an SDM tool affects the quality of SDM and anticoagulant treatment decisions in at-risk patients with AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This encounter-randomized trial recruited patients with nonvalvular AF who were considering starting or reviewing anticoagulant treatment and their clinicians at academic, community, and safety-net medical centers between January 30, 2017 and June 27, 2019. Encounters were randomized to either the standard care arm or care that included the use of an SDM tool (intervention arm). Data were analyzed from August 1 to November 30, 2019. Interventions: Standard care or care using the Anticoagulation Choice Shared Decision Making tool (which presents individualized risk estimates and compares anticoagulant treatment options across issues of importance to patients) during the clinical encounter. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality of SDM (which included quality of communication, patient knowledge about AF and anticoagulant treatment, accuracy of patient estimates of their own stroke risk [within 30% of their estimate], decisional conflict, and satisfaction), decisions made during the encounter, duration of the encounter, and clinician involvement of patients in the SDM process. Results: The clinical trial enrolled 922 patients (559 men [60.6%]; mean [SD] age, 71 [11] years) and 244 clinicians. A total of 463 patients were randomized to the intervention arm and 459 patients to the standard care arm. Participants in both arms reported high communication quality, high knowledge, and low decisional conflict, demonstrated low accuracy in their risk perception, and would similarly recommend the approach used in their encounter. Clinicians were significantly more satisfied after intervention encounters (400 of 453 encounters [88.3%] vs 277 of 448 encounters [61.8%]; adjusted relative risk, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.42-1.53). A total of 747 of 873 patients (85.6%) chose to start or continue receiving an anticoagulant medication. Patient involvement in decision-making (as assessed through video recordings of the encounters using the Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making 12-item scale) scores were significantly higher in the intervention arm (mean [SD] score, 33.0 [10.8] points vs 29.1 [13.1] points, respectively; adjusted mean difference, 4.2 points; 95% CI, 2.8-5.6 points). No significant between-arm difference was found in encounter duration (mean [SD] duration, 32 [16] minutes in the intervention arm vs 31 [17] minutes in the standard care arm; adjusted mean between-arm difference, 1.1; 95% CI, -0.3 to 2.5 minutes). Conclusion and Relevance: The use of an SDM encounter tool improved several measures of SDM quality and clinician satisfaction, with no significant effect on treatment decisions or encounter duration. These results help to calibrate expectations about the value of implementing SDM tools in the care of patients with AF. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02905032.

Using Shared Decision-Making Tools and Patient-Clinician Conversations About Costs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how shared decision-making (SDM) tools used during clinical encounters that raise cost as an issue impact the incidence of cost conversations between patients and clinicians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomly selected set of 220 video recordings of clinical encounters were analyzed. Videos were obtained from eight practice-based randomized clinical trials and one quasi-randomized clinical trial (pre- and post-) comparing care with and without SDM tools. The secondary analysis took place in 2018 from trials ran between 2007 and 2015. RESULTS: Most patient participants were white (85%), educated (38% completed college), middle-aged (mean age 56 years), and female (61%). There were 105 encounters with and 115 without the SDM tool. Encounters with SDM tools were more likely to include both general cost conversations (62% vs 36%, odds ratio [OR]: 9.6; 95% CI: 4 to 26) as well as conversations on medication costs specifically (89% vs 51%, P=.01). However, clinicians using SDM tools were less likely to address cost issues during the encounter (37% vs 51%, P=.04). Encounters with patients with less than a college degree were also associated with a higher incidence of cost conversations. CONCLUSION: Using SDM tools that raise cost as an issue increased the occurrence of cost conversations but was less likely to address cost issues or offer potential solutions to patients' cost concerns. This result suggests that SDM tools used during the consultation can trigger cost conversations but are insufficient to support them.

Documentation of hypoglycemia assessment among adults with diabetes during clinical encounters in primary care and endocrinology practices.

PURPOSE: To examine the proportion of diabetes-focused clinical encounters in primary care and endocrinology practices where the evaluation for hypoglycemia is documented; and when it is, identify clinicians' stated actions in response to patient-reported events. METHODS: A total of 470 diabetes-focused encounters among 283 patients nonpregnant adults (≥18 years) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus in this retrospective cohort study. Participants were randomly identified in blocks of treatment strategy and care location (95 and 52 primary care encounters among hypoglycemia-prone medications (i.e. insulin, sulfonylurea) and others patients, respectively; 94 and 42 endocrinology encounters among hypo-treated and others, respectively). Documentation of hypoglycemia and subsequent management plan in the electronic health record were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 132 (46.6%) patients had documentation of hypoglycemia assessment, significantly more prevalent among hypo-treated patients seen in endocrinology than in primary care (72.3% vs. 47.4%; P = 0.001). Hypoglycemia was identified by patient in 38.2% of encounters. Odds of hypoglycemia assessment documentation was highest among the hypo-treated (OR 13.6; 95% CI 5.5-33.74, vs. others) and patients seen in endocrine clinic (OR 4.48; 95% CI 2.3-8.6, vs. primary care). After documentation of hypoglycemia, treatment was modified in 30% primary care and 46% endocrine clinic encounters; P = 0.31. Few patients were referred to diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES). CONCLUSIONS: Continued efforts to improve hypoglycemia evaluation, documentation, and management are needed, particularly in primary care. This includes not only screening at-risk patients for hypoglycemia, but also modifying their treatment regimens and/or leveraging DSMES.

Is My Patient Overwhelmed?: Determining Thresholds for Acceptable Burden of Treatment Using Data From the ComPaRe e-Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the highest burden of treatment beyond which patients with chronic conditions consider their current investments of time and effort in health care unsustainable. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data collected between January 1, 2017 and October 1, 2018 in the Community of Patients for Research (ComPaRe), an ongoing e-cohort of adult patients with chronic conditions in France. We matched participants' answers to the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) and to a Yes/No anchor question: "Think about all the things you do to care for yourself. Do you think you could continue investing the same amount of time, energy, and money in your health care lifelong?" We defined the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the burden of treatment as the TBQ score below which 75% of patients reported an acceptable burden state. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 2413 patients (1781 [73.8%] women, 1248 [51.7%] multimorbid, median age: 48 (interquartile range, 36-59] years) enrolled in ComPaRe. Of these, 38% (917 of 2413) reported that they would be unable to continue the same investment of energy, time, and money in health care lifelong. The PASS for the burden of treatment was at 39% of the maximal score (ie, TBQ score = 59/150; 95% CI, 52-64) Using these results, clinicians can detect patients at risk for becoming overwhelmed by their medical care by identifying patients with TBQ scores of 59 or higher. CONCLUSION: About 40% of patients with chronic conditions report being unable to sustain current investments of energy, time, and money in health care lifelong. The PASS for treatment burden provides a practical yardstick to help clinicians and researchers interpret scores for burden of treatment.

What is the effect of a decision aid in potentially vulnerable parents? Insights from the head CT choice randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypotheses that use of the Head CT Choice decision aid would be similarly effective in all parent/patient dyads but parents with high (vs low) numeracy experience a greater increase in knowledge while those with low (vs high) health literacy experience a greater increase in trust. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial conducted at seven sites. One hundred seventy-two clinicians caring for 971 children at intermediate risk for clinically important traumatic brain injuries were randomized to shared decision making facilitated by the DA (n = 493) or to usual care (n = 478). We assessed for subgroup effects based on patient and parent characteristics, including socioeconomic status (health literacy, numeracy and income). We tested for interactions using regression models with indicators for arm assignment and study site. RESULTS: The decision aid did not increase knowledge more in parents with high numeracy (P for interaction [Pint ] = 0.14) or physician trust more in parents with low health literacy (Pint  = 0.34). The decision aid decreased decisional conflict more in non-white parents (decisional conflict scale, -8.14, 95% CI: -12.33 to -3.95; Pint  = 0.05) and increased physician trust more in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents (trust in physician scale, OR: 8.59, 95% CI: 2.35-14.83; Pint  = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Head CT Choice decision aid resulted in less decisional conflict in non-white parents and greater physician trust in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents. Decision aids may be particularly effective in potentially vulnerable parents.

Adaptation and validation of a Spanish version of the treatment burden questionnaire in patients with multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: The Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) is a self-reported measure of the effect of treatment workload on patient wellbeing. We sought to validate the TBQ in Spanish and use it to estimate the burden of treatment in Argentinian patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: The TBQ was forward-backward translated into Spanish. Two focus groups and 25 semi-structured interviews focused on wording and possible item exclusion. Validation was performed in 2 steps. First, 162 patients across a range of MS severity completed the questionnaire. Confirmatory factor analysis assessed the dimensional structure of the TBQ. Construct validity was assessed by studying correlations with fatigue and quality of life (QoL). Then, in a second cohort of 171 patients, we evaluated the association between TBQ scores and patients' sex, age, education level, employment status, type of MS, disease duration, comorbidities, EDSS, pharmacological treatment and medication adherence. RESULTS: The questionnaire presented a 3-factor structure in which burden was related to pharmacological treatment; comprehensive health assistance; and psycho-social-economic context. Composite reliability was > 0.8 for all factors. TBQ showed positive correlation with fatigue (rs = 0.467, p = 0.006), negative correlation with QoL (rs - 0.446, p = 0.009). For the second cohort, total TBQ score was 43 (SD 29). Lowest scores were observed on self-monitoring (0.53, SD 1.3) and highest for administrative load (4.2, SD 3.4). Inverse association was found between the TBQ score and medication adherence (r 0.243 p = 0.001). TBQ scores also correlated with daily patient pill/injection requirements (r 0.175 p = 0.020). Individuals receiving injectable treatment scored higher than patients on oral drugs (total TBQ 51 (SD 32) vs 39 (SD 27) p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The TBQ in Spanish is a reliable instrument and showed adequate correlation with QoL and adherence scales in MS patients. TBQ may benefit health resources allocation and provide tailor therapeutic interventions to construct a minimally disruptive care.

Adoption of New Glucose-Lowering Medications in the U.S.-The Case of SGLT2 Inhibitors: Nationwide Cohort Study.

Background: High-quality diabetes care is evidence-based, timely, and equitable. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are the most recently approved class of glucose-lowering medications with additional cardio- and renal-protective benefits and low risk of hypoglycemia. Cardiovascular and kidney disease are among the most common chronic diabetes complications, whereas hypoglycemia is the most prevalent adverse effect of glucose-lowering therapy. We examine the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with early SGLT2i initiation and appropriateness of use based on contemporaneous scientific evidence. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of medical and pharmacy claims data from OptumLabs® Data Warehouse for commercially insured and Medicare Advantage adult beneficiaries with diabetes types 1 and 2, who filled any glucose-lowering medication between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2016. Demographic (age, sex, race, income), clinical (comorbidities), and insurance-related factors affecting first prescription for a SGLT2i were examined using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 1,054,727 adults with pharmacologically treated diabetes, 7.2% (n = 75,500) initiated a SGLT2i. Patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.96), heart failure (HF) (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.91-0.94), kidney disease (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.78-0.81), and severe hypoglycemia (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98) were all less likely to start a SGLT2i; P < 0.001 for all. SGLT2i were also less likely to be started by patients ≥75 years (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.55-0.59, vs. 18-44 years), Black patients (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.91-0.95, vs. White), and those with Medicare Advantage insurance (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.62-0.64, vs. commercial). Conclusions: Younger, healthier, non-Black patients with commercial health insurance were most likely to start taking SGLT2i. Patients with MI, HF, kidney disease, and prior hypoglycemia were less likely to use SGLT2i, despite evidence supporting their preferential use in these patients. Efforts to address this treatment-risk paradox may help improve health outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes.

Variation in Treatment Practices for Subclinical Hypothyroidism in Pregnancy: US National Assessment.

CONTEXT: Although thyroid hormone replacement may improve outcomes in pregnant women with subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH), the extent to which they receive treatment is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe levothyroxine (LT4) treatment practices for pregnant women with SCH. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large US administrative claims database. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women with SCH defined by untreated TSH 2.5 to 10 mIU/L. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Initiation of LT4 as a function of treating clinician specialty (endocrinology, obstetrics/gynecology, primary care, or other), baseline TSH, patient clinical and demographic factors, and US region. RESULTS: We identified 7990 pregnant women with SCH; only 1214 (15.2%) received LT4. Treatment was more likely in patients with higher TSH, obesity, recurrent pregnancy loss, thyroid disease, and cared for by endocrinologists. Proportion of treated women increased over time; LT4 treatment was twice as likely in 2014 as in 2010. Women in Northeast and West US were more likely to receive LT4 compared with other regions. Asian women were more likely, whereas Hispanic women were less likely, to receive LT4 compared with white women. Endocrinologists started LT4 at lower TSH thresholds than other specialties, and treated women who were more likely to have had recurrent pregnancy loss and thyroid disease than women treated by other clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: We found large variation in the prescription of LT4 to pregnant women with SCH, although most treatment-eligible women remained untreated. Therapy initiation is associated with geographic, clinician, and patient characteristics. This evidence can inform quality improvement efforts to optimize care for pregnant women with SCH.