Perceptions of Patients with Primary Nonadherence to Statin Medications.

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

Prevalence and Knowledge of Potential Interactions Between Over-the-Counter Products and Apixaban.

BACKGROUND: Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as apixaban, are the most commonly prescribed anticoagulants, with advantages in that they do not require routine monitoring. However, less frequent contact with healthcare professionals may contribute to poor patient knowledge about potential interactions between over-the-counter (OTC) products and DOACs. OBJECTIVE: Determine the prevalence of use of OTC products (OTC medications and dietary supplements) with potentially serious apixaban interactions and assess patient knowledge of potential interactions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Academic-affiliated outpatient medical practices in northern and southern California. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 791 English- or Spanish-speaking patients prescribed apixaban. MEASUREMENTS: Use and knowledge of OTC medications and dietary supplements with potentially serious apixaban interactions. RESULTS: Almost all respondents (n = 771; 97.5%) reported OTC product use. Of respondents, 33% (n = 266) took at least one OTC product with potentially serious apixaban interactions daily/most days and 53 (6.7%) took multiple products (mean = 2.6 [SD = 2.6]). Aspirin was taken daily by 116 (14.7%; of which 75 [64.7%] also consumed other potentially interacting OTC products), and some days/as needed by an additional 82 (10.4%). Ibuprofen and naproxen were taken daily/most days by 14 (1.8%) and occasionally by 225 (28.5%). Dietary supplements with potentially serious interactions were taken daily/most days by 160 (20.2%). Approximately 66% of respondents were either uncertain or incorrect about the potential for increased bleeding from combining nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and apixaban. Less knowledge about OTC products with potentially serious interactions was associated with greater OTC product use (odds ratio = 0.54; 95% confidence interval = 0.35-0.85). CONCLUSION: Significant numbers of patients take OTC products (particularly dietary supplements) with potentially serious interactions with the DOAC apixaban and appear to lack knowledge about potentially harmful interactions. Interventions are needed to educate patients and healthcare providers about potential dangers of taking interacting OTC products in combination with apixaban, and data are needed on outcomes associated with concomitant apixaban-OTC product use. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:155-162, 2019.

Reducing parental trauma and stress in neonatal intensive care: systematic review and meta-analysis of hospital interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To classify NICU interventions for parental distress and quantify their effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN: We systematically reviewed controlled studies published before 2017 measuring NICU parental distress, defined broad intervention categories, and used random-effects meta-analysis to quantify treatment effectiveness. RESULTS: Among 1643 unique records, 58 eligible trials predominantly studied mothers of preterm infants. Interventions tested in 22 randomized trials decreased parental distress (p < 0.001) and demonstrated improvement beyond 6 months (p < 0.005). In subgroup analyses, complementary/alternative medicine and family-centered instruction interventions each decreased distress symptoms (p < 0.01), with fathers and mothers improving to similar extents. Most psychotherapy studies decreased distress individually but did not qualify for meta-analysis as a group. CONCLUSION: NICU interventions modestly reduced parental distress. We identified family-centered instruction as a target for implementation and complementary/alternative medicine as a target for further study. Investigators must develop psychosocial interventions that serve NICU parents at large, including fathers and parents of full-term infants.

Factors Related to Disclosure and Nondisclosure of Dietary Supplements in Primary Care, Integrative Medicine, and Naturopathic Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Patients infrequently disclose use of dietary supplements to providers. Little is known about factors that motivate patients to disclose supplement use. The study aimed to identify reported factors motivating patients' disclosure and nondisclosure of dietary supplement use and explore differences based on type of supplement and provider practice. METHODS: Mixed methods study combining qualitative content analysis of semi-structured interviews with statistical analyses to assess differences in identified factors by provider practice type and supplement type. Seventy-eight English-speaking patients who reported taking 466 dietary supplements in the previous 30 days were recruited from primary care and Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM), and Integrative Medicine (IM) offices in Southern California. RESULTS: We identified nine themes related to disclosure and nine related to nondisclosure of dietary supplement use. Major themes were features of the office visit, circumstances in patient health and medical care, and provider/patient characteristics. The most commonly raised theme promoting disclosure of supplement use was provider inquiry. Patients associate disclosure with having concerns about a supplement but also with annual physical exams and some routine topics of discussion, including self-care, lab results, and new medication prescriptions. Themes related to nondisclosure included lack of provider inquiry, features of the office visit, such as supplements being unrelated to the visit purpose, and patients' convictions that supplements are safe or not important to discuss. Themes did not vary by supplement type. Primary care patients were more likely than CAM/IM patients to attribute nondisclosure to convictions that supplements were beneficial, not worth mentioning, or equivalent to food (p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When providers fail to ask directly about dietary supplement use, disclosure is often an impromptu decision that is driven by the content of provider-patient interactions. Ensuring disclosure of dietary supplement use to prevent potential drug-supplement interactions or adverse health outcomes likely requires consistent, proactive provider queries about supplement use.

Provider Recommendations in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: An Analysis of Audio-Recorded Discussions about Vitamin D.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how providers communicate recommendations when scientific uncertainty exists. OBJECTIVES: To compare provider recommendations to those in the scientific literature, with a focus on whether uncertainty was communicated. DESIGN: Qualitative (inductive systematic content analysis) and quantitative analysis of previously collected audio-recorded provider-patient office visits. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-one providers and a socio-economically diverse convenience sample of 603 of their patients from outpatient community- and academic-based primary care, integrative medicine, and complementary and alternative medicine provider offices in Southern California. MAIN MEASURES: Comparison of provider information-giving about vitamin D to professional guidelines and scientific information for which conflicting recommendations or insufficient scientific evidence exists; certainty with which information was conveyed. RESULTS: Ninety-two (15.3 %) of 603 visit discussions touched upon issues related to vitamin D testing, management and benefits. Vitamin D deficiency screening was discussed with 23 (25 %) patients, the definition of vitamin D deficiency with 21 (22.8 %), the optimal range for vitamin D levels with 26 (28.3 %), vitamin D supplementation dosing with 50 (54.3 %), and benefits of supplementation with 46 (50 %). For each of the professional guidelines/scientific information examined, providers conveyed information that deviated from professional guidelines and the existing scientific evidence. Of 166 statements made about vitamin D in this study, providers conveyed 160 (96.4 %) with certainty, without mention of any equivocal or contradictory evidence in the scientific literature. No uncertainty was mentioned when vitamin D dosing was discussed, even when recommended dosing was higher than guideline recommendations. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Providers convey the vast majority of information and recommendations about vitamin D with certainty, even though the scientific literature contains inconsistent recommendations and declarations of inadequate evidence. Not communicating uncertainty blurs the contrast between evidence-based recommendations and those without evidence. Providers should explore best practices for involving patients in decision-making by acknowledging the uncertainty behind their recommendations.

A cross-sectional study of provider and patient characteristics associated with outpatient disclosures of dietary supplement use.

OBJECTIVE: Explore patterns in patients' disclosures of supplement use and identify provider and patient characteristics associated with disclosures. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 61 outpatient primary care, integrative medicine, and complementary medicine providers, and 603 of their patients. Primary outcomes were supplement disclosures (based on audio recorded office visits, post-visit patient surveys and medical record abstractions for the day of the visits). RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of 603 patients reported on a post-visit survey that they took a total of 2107 dietary supplements. Of those taking supplements, 232 patients (48.6%) discussed at least one supplement with their provider on the day of their office visit. However, patients disclosed only 714 (33.9%) of the 2107 supplements they were taking. Patients more frequently disclosed supplement use when they saw providers who attributed greater importance to asking about supplements. Patient characteristics such as patient activation, number of medical conditions, and use of prescription medications were not associated with disclosure of supplement use. CONCLUSIONS: Provider rating of the importance of asking about supplements is a major factor prompting patients' disclosures of supplement use. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Provider-targeted interventions to encourage provider awareness about potential supplement-drug interactions are needed to increase disclosures about dietary supplement use.

Provider and patient expectations for dietary supplement discussions.

BACKGROUND: Dietary supplement use in the United States is common. Patients can procure supplements without a prescription, and often do not disclose supplement use to their healthcare providers. Providers and patients may be uncertain about what would be appropriate or helpful in discussions of supplements during routine office visits. OBJECTIVE: To explore provider and patient expectations for discussions of dietary supplements. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of healthcare providers from three specialties and their patients who reported taking supplements. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five outpatient providers (14 primary care, six integrative medicine, and 15 complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers) and 107 of their patients. APPROACH: Qualitative analysis of transcripts using grounded theory and iterative review. RESULTS: Both providers and patients raised twelve common topics about dietary supplements that they felt were important to discuss during office visits, such as: supplements taken; supplement risks (interactions, safety/harm, side effects/adverse events); treatment benefits; efficacy; alternative treatments; and patient expectations/preferences for treatment. Some topics were mentioned more frequently by providers than patients, such as how to take, reason for taking, and evidence for use. Providers raised several topics that were mentioned infrequently by patients. Supplement costs and regulations were not brought up by any patients, even though consideration of these topics could influence patient decisions to take supplements. Complementary healthcare providers brought up topics not mentioned by primary care providers, such as the importance of supplement brands and supplement mega-dosing. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers have concordant views about the need to discuss patient supplement use and ensure patient safety. Patients may undervalue, be unaware of, or discount information about cost or regulations that could affect their decision-making about supplement use. Future studies could examine the value, acceptability, and influence of a more comprehensive approach to discussions to help patients appropriately evaluate supplements.

Physician-patient communication about dietary supplements.

OBJECTIVE: Describe the content and frequency of provider-patient dietary supplement discussions during primary care office visits. METHODS: Inductive content analysis of 1477 transcribed audio-recorded office visits to 102 primary care providers was combined with patient and provider surveys. Encounters were collected in Los Angeles, CA (2009-2010), geographically diverse practice settings across the United States (2004-2005), and Sacramento, CA (1998-1999). RESULTS: Providers discussed 738 dietary supplements during encounters with 357 patients (24.2% of all encounters in the data). They mentioned: (1) reason for taking the supplement for 46.5% of dietary supplements; (2) how to take the supplement for 28.2%; (3) potential risks for 17.3%; (4) supplement effectiveness for 16.7%; and (5) supplement cost or affordability for 4.2%. Of these five topics, a mean of 1.13 (SD=1.2) topics were discussed for each supplement. More topics were reviewed for non-vitamin non-mineral supplements (mean 1.47 (SD=1.2)) than for vitamin/mineral supplements (mean 0.99 (SD=1.1); p<0.001). CONCLUSION: While discussions about supplements are occurring, it is clear that more discussion might be needed to inform patient decisions about supplement use. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians could more frequently address topics that may influence patient dietary supplement use, such as the risks, effectiveness, and costs of supplements.

Negotiating complementary and alternative medicine use in primary care visits with older patients.

OBJECTIVE: To empirically investigate the ways in which patients and providers discuss Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) treatment in primary care visits. METHODS: Audio recordings from visits between 256 adult patients aged 50 years and older and 28 primary care physicians were transcribed and analyzed using discourse analysis, an empirical sociolinguistic methodology focusing on how language is used to negotiate meaning. RESULTS: Discussion about CAM occurred 128 times in 82 of 256 visits (32.0%). The most frequently discussed CAM modalities were non-vitamin, non-mineral supplements and massage. Three physician-patient interactions were analyzed turn-by-turn to demonstrate negotiations about CAM use. Patients raised CAM discussions to seek physician expertise about treatments, and physicians adopted a range of responses along a continuum that included encouragement, neutrality, and discouragement. Despite differential knowledge about CAM treatments, physicians helped patients assess the risks and benefits of CAM treatments and made recommendations based on patient preferences for treatment. CONCLUSION: Regardless of a physician's stance or knowledge about CAM, she or he can help patients negotiate CAM treatment decisions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providers do not have to possess extensive knowledge about specific CAM treatments to have meaningful discussions with patients and to give patients a framework for evaluating CAM treatment use.