Decisional Regret Surrounding Dialysis Initiation: A Comparative Analysis.

Rationale & Objective: Dialysis comes with a substantial treatment burden, so patients must select care plans that align with their preferences. We aimed to deepen the understanding of decisional regret with dialysis choices. Study Design: This study had a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design. Setting & Participants: All patients from a single academic medical center prescribed maintenance in-center hemodialysis or presenting for home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis check-up during 3 weeks were approached for survey. A total of 78 patients agreed to participate. Patients with the highest (15 patients) and lowest decisional regret (20 patients) were invited to semistructured interviews. Predictors: Decisional regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale were used in this study. Analytical Approach: Quantitatively, we examined correlations between the decision regret scale and illness intrusiveness scale and sorted patients into the highest and lowest decision regret scale quartiles for further interviews; then, we compared patient characteristics between those that consented to interview in high and low decisional regret. Qualitatively, we used an adapted grounded theory approach to examine differences between interviewed patients with high and low decisional regret. Results: Of patients invited to participate in the interviews, 21 patients (8 high regret, 13 low regret) agreed. We observed that patients with high decisional regret displayed resignation toward dialysis, disruption of their sense of self and social roles, and self-blame, whereas patients with low decisional regret demonstrated positivity, integration of dialysis into their identity, and self-compassion. Limitations: Patients with the highest levels of decisional regret may have already withdrawn from dialysis. Patients could complete interviews in any location (eg, home, dialysis unit, and clinical office), which may have influenced patient disclosure. Conclusions: Although all patients experienced disruption after dialysis initiation, patients' approach to adversity differs between patients experiencing high versus low regret. This study identifies emotional responses to dialysis that may be modifiable through patient-support interventions.

As part of a quality improvement initiative in our dialysis practice, a patient stated, "I wish I never started dialysis." This quote served as the catalyst for embarking on a research project with the aim to understand why patients living with end-stage kidney disease have regret about starting and continuing dialysis, a lifesaving but time-intensive measure. We surveyed and interviewed patients on the topic and learned that patients experiencing regret had a disrupted sense of self and blamed themselves for their need of dialysis. Patients with little to no regret demonstrated positivity and self-compassion. These findings will help health care professionals as they work with patients considering dialysis or having newly started dialysis.

Realtime Diagnosis from Electrocardiogram Artificial Intelligence-Guided Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with Long Follow-Up (REGAL): Rationale and design of a pragmatic, decentralized, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased risks of stroke and dementia. Early diagnosis and treatment could reduce the disease burden, but AF is often undiagnosed. An artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm has been shown to identify patients with previously unrecognized AF; however, monitoring these high-risk patients has been challenging. Consumer wearable devices could be an alternative to enable long-term follow-up. OBJECTIVES: To test whether Apple Watch, used as a long-term monitoring device, can enable early diagnosis of AF in patients who were identified as having high risk based on AI-ECG. DESIGN: The Realtime diagnosis from Electrocardiogram (ECG) Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Guided Screening for Atrial Fibrillation (AF) with Long Follow-up (REGAL) study is a pragmatic trial that will accrue up to 2,000 older adults with a high likelihood of unrecognized AF determined by AI-ECG to reach our target of 1,420 completed participants. Participants will be 1:1 randomized to intervention or control and will be followed up for 2 years. Patients in the intervention arm will receive or use their existing Apple Watch and iPhone and record a 30-second ECG using the watch routinely or if an abnormal heart rate notification is prompted. The primary outcome is newly diagnosed AF. Secondary outcomes include changes in cognitive function, stroke, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. The trial will utilize a pragmatic, digitally-enabled, decentralized design to allow patients to consent and receive follow-up remotely without traveling to the study sites. SUMMARY: The REGAL trial will examine whether a consumer wearable device can serve as a long-term monitoring approach in older adults to detect AF and prevent cognitive function decline. If successful, the approach could have significant implications on how future clinical practice can leverage consumer devices for early diagnosis and disease prevention. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: : NCT05923359.

Physicians' perspectives on percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion for patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increasing uptake of transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) for stroke reduction in atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the perceptions and approaches among a nationally representative sample of physicians. METHODS: Using the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, we selected a random sample of 500 physicians from each of the specialties: general cardiologists, interventional cardiologists, electrophysiologists, and vascular neurologists. The participants received the survey by mail up to three times from November 9, 2021 to January 14, 2022. In addition to the questions about experiences, perceptions, and approaches, physicians were randomly assigned to 1 of the 4 versions of a patient vignette: white man, white woman, black man, and black woman, to investigate potential bias in decision-making. RESULTS: The top three reasons for considering LAAO were: a history of intracranial bleeding (94.3%), a history of major extracranial bleeding (91.8%), and gastrointestinal lesions (59.0%), whereas the top three reasons for withholding LAAO were: other indications for long-term oral anticoagulation (87.7%), a low bleeding risk (77.0%), and a low stroke risk (65.6%). For the reasons limiting recommendations for LAAO, 59.8% mentioned procedural risks, 42.6% mentioned "limiting efficacy data comparing LAAO to NOAC" and 32.8% mentioned "limited safety data comparing LAAO to NOAC." There was no difference in physicians' decision-making by patients' race, gender, or the concordance between patients' and physicians' race or gender. CONCLUSIONS: In the first U.S. national physician survey of LAAO, individual physicians' perspectives varied greatly, which provided information that will help customize future educational activities for different audiences. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Although diverse practice patterns of LAAO have been documented, little is known about the reasoning or perceptions that drive these variations. Unlike prior surveys that were directed to Centers that performed LAAO, the current survey obtained insights from individual physicians, not only those who perform the procedures (interventional cardiologists and electrophysiologists) but also those who are closely involved in the decision-making and referral process (general cardiologists and vascular neurologists). The findings identify key evidence gaps and help prioritize future studies to establish a consistent and evidence-based best practice for AF stroke prevention.

Financial Toxicity in the Clinical Encounter: A Paired Survey of Patient and Clinician Perceptions.

Objective: To compare the agreement between patient and clinician perceptions of care-related financial issues. Patients and Methods: We surveyed patient-clinician dyads immediately after an outpatient medical encounter between September 2019 and May 2021. They were asked to separately rate (1-10) patient's level of difficulty in paying medical bills and the importance of discussing cost issues with that patient during clinical encounters. We calculated agreement between patient-clinician ratings using the intraclass correlation coefficient and used random effects regression models to identify patient predictors of paired score differences in difficulty and importance of ratings. Results: 58 pairs of patients (n=58) and clinicians (n=40) completed the survey. Patient-clinician agreement was poor for both measures, but higher for difficulty in paying medical bills (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.375; 95% CI, 0.13-0.57) than for the importance of discussing cost (-0.051; 95% CI, -0.31 to 0.21). Agreement on difficulty in paying medical bills was not lower in encounters with conversations about the cost of care. In adjusted models, poor patient-clinician agreement on difficulty in paying medical bills was associated with lower patient socioeconomic status and education level, whereas poor agreement on patient-perceived importance of discussing cost was significant for patients who were White, married, reported 1 or more long-term conditions, and had higher education and income levels. Conclusion: Even in encounters where cost conversations occurred, there was poor patient-clinician agreement on ratings of the patient's difficulty in paying medical bills and perceived importance of discussing cost issues. Clinicians need more training and support in detecting the level of financial burden and tailoring cost conversations to the needs of individual patients.

Investigating gender-based differential item functioning on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) using qualitative content analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate potential gender-based differences in interpreting the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-23) and to explore if there are aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) not captured by the KCCQ-23 that are important to assess in men and/or women with heart failure (HF). METHODS: Patients ≥ 22 years of age with clinician-diagnosed HF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40% were recruited from two academic medical centers to participate in semi-structured concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. Enrollment was stratified by patient-identified gender (half women/half men). All interviews were conducted over the phone/web and audio recorded. Interviews were transcribed and descriptive qualitative content analysis was used to summarize findings overall and by gender. RESULTS: Twenty-five adults (56% women) diagnosed with HF participated. The average age was 67 years (range: 25-88). Women attributed a wider variety of symptoms to HF than men. Some participants had difficulty differentiating whether their experiences were due to HF, side effects of their medications, or age. We found very little evidence that participants interpreted KCCQ-23 items differently based on gender. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our findings indicate that interpretation of the KCCQ-23 items were similar in men and women. However, some modifications to items may improve clarity of interpretation for a wide range of patients.

Artificial intelligence-guided screening for atrial fibrillation using electrocardiogram during sinus rhythm: a prospective non-randomised interventional trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous atrial fibrillation screening trials have highlighted the need for more targeted approaches. We did a pragmatic study to evaluate the effectiveness of an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm-guided targeted screening approach for identifying previously unrecognised atrial fibrillation. METHODS: For this non-randomised interventional trial, we prospectively recruited patients with stroke risk factors but with no known atrial fibrillation who had an electrocardiogram (ECG) done in routine practice. Participants wore a continuous ambulatory heart rhythm monitor for up to 30 days, with the data transmitted in near real time through a cellular connection. The AI algorithm was applied to the ECGs to divide patients into high-risk or low-risk groups. The primary outcome was newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. In a secondary analysis, trial participants were propensity-score matched (1:1) to individuals from the eligible but unenrolled population who served as real-world controls. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04208971. FINDINGS: 1003 patients with a mean age of 74 years (SD 8·8) from 40 US states completed the study. Over a mean 22·3 days of continuous monitoring, atrial fibrillation was detected in six (1·6%) of 370 patients with low risk and 48 (7·6%) of 633 with high risk (odds ratio 4·98, 95% CI 2·11-11·75, p=0·0002). Compared with usual care, AI-guided screening was associated with increased detection of atrial fibrillation (high-risk group: 3·6% [95% CI 2·3-5·4] with usual care vs 10·6% [8·3-13·2] with AI-guided screening, p<0·0001; low-risk group: 0·9% vs 2·4%, p=0·12) over a median follow-up of 9·9 months (IQR 7·1-11·0). INTERPRETATION: An AI-guided targeted screening approach that leverages existing clinical data increased the yield for atrial fibrillation detection and could improve the effectiveness of atrial fibrillation screening. FUNDING: Mayo Clinic Robert D and Patricia E Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery.

Effect of hospital-at-home vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill adults: study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delivering acute hospital care to patients at home might reduce costs and improve patient experience. Mayo Clinic's Advanced Care at Home (ACH) program is a novel virtual hybrid model of "Hospital at Home." This pragmatic randomized controlled non-inferiority trial aims to compare two acute care delivery models: ACH vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill patients. METHODS: We aim to enroll 360 acutely ill adult patients (≥18 years) who are admitted to three hospitals in Arizona, Florida, and Wisconsin, two of which are academic medical centers and one is a community-based practice. The eligibility criteria will follow what is used in routine practice determined by local clinical teams, including clinical stability, social stability, health insurance plans, and zip codes. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to ACH or traditional inpatient care, stratified by site. The primary outcome is a composite outcome of all-cause mortality and 30-day readmission. Secondary outcomes include individual outcomes in the composite endpoint, fall with injury, medication errors, emergency room visit, transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), cost, the number of days alive out of hospital, and patient-reported quality of life. A mixed-methods study will be conducted with patients, clinicians, and other staff to investigate their experience. DISCUSSION: The pragmatic trial will examine a novel virtual hybrid model for delivering high-acuity medical care at home. The findings will inform patient selection and future large-scale implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05212077. Registered on 27 January 2022.

Diabetes Rescue, Engagement and Management (D-REM): rationale and design of a pragmatic clinical trial of a community paramedicine programme to improve diabetes care.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes is one of the most common serious chronic health conditions in the USA. People living with diabetes face multiple barriers to optimal diabetes care, including gaps in access to medical care and self-management education, diabetes distress, and high burden of treatment. Community paramedics (CPs) are uniquely positioned to support multidisciplinary care for patients with diabetes by delivering focused diabetes self-management education and support and bridging the gaps between patients and the clinical and community resources they need to live well with their disease. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a pragmatic single-arm prospective trial of a CP-led Diabetes Rescue, Engagement and Management (D-REM) programme that seeks to reduce diabetes distress. We will enrol 70 adults (≥18 years) with diabetes who have haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)≥9.0%, experienced an emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalisation for any cause within the prior 6 months, and reside in areas with available CP support in Southeast Minnesota (Olmsted, Freeborn and Mower counties) and Northwest Wisconsin (Barron, Rusk and Dunn counties). Participants will be identified using Mayo Clinic electronic health records, contacted for consent and enrolled into the D-REM programme. Visit frequency will be individualised for each patient, but will be an average of four CP visits over the course of approximately 1 month. Outcomes will be change in diabetes distress (primary outcome), confidence in diabetes self-management, health-related quality of life, self-reported hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, HbA1c, ED visits and hospitalisations. Outcomes will be assessed on enrolment, programme completion and 3 months after programme completion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations. If demonstrated to be successful, this model of care can be implemented across diverse settings and populations to support patients living with diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04385758.

Do patients with high versus low treatment and illness burden have different needs? A mixed-methods study of patients living on dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 750,000 people in the U.S. live with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD); the majority receive dialysis. Despite the importance of adherence to dialysis, it remains suboptimal, and one contributor may be patients' insufficient capacity to cope with their treatment and illness burden. However, it is unclear what, if any, differences exist between patients reporting high versus low treatment and illness burden. METHODS: We sought to understand these differences using a mixed methods, explanatory sequential design. We enrolled adult patients receiving dialysis, including in-center hemodialysis, home hemodialysis, and peritoneal dialysis. Descriptive patient characteristics were collected. Participants' treatment and illness burden was measured using the Illness Intrusiveness Scale (IIS). Participants scoring in the highest quartile were defined as having high burden, and participants scoring in the lowest quartile as having low burden. Participants in both quartiles were invited to participate in interviews and observations. RESULTS: Quantitatively, participants in the high burden group were significantly younger (mean = 48.4 years vs. 68.6 years respectively, p = <0.001). No other quantitative differences were observed. Qualitatively, we found differences in patient self-management practices, such as the high burden group having difficulty establishing a new rhythm of life to cope with dialysis, greater disruption in social roles and self-perception, fewer appraisal focused coping strategies, more difficulty maintaining social networks, and more negatively portrayed experiences early in their dialysis journey. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients on dialysis reporting the greatest illness and treatment burden have difficulties that their low-burden counterparts do not report, which may be amenable to intervention.

Patient Work and Treatment Burden in Type 2 Diabetes: A Mixed-Methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: To use quantitative and qualitative methods to characterize the work patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) enact and explore the interactions between illness, treatment, and life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this mixed-methods, descriptive study, adult patients with T2DM seen at the outpatient diabetes clinic at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from February 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017, were invited to participate. The study had 3 phases. In phase 1, the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS) scale was used to quantify treatment burden. In phase 2, a convenience sample of patients used a smartphone application to describe, in real time, time spent completing diabetes self-management tasks and to upload descriptive digital photographs. In phase 3, these data were explored in qualitative interviews that were analyed by 2 investigators using deductive analysis. RESULTS: Of 162 participants recruited, 160 returned the survey (phase 1); of the 50 participants who used the smartphone application (phase 2), we interviewed 17 (phase 3). The areas in which patients reported highest treatment burden were difficulty with negotiating health services (eg, coordinating medical appointments), medical expenses, and mental/physical exhaustion with self-care. Participants reported that medical appointments required about 2.5 hours per day, and completing administrative tasks related to health care required about 45 minutes. Time spent on health behaviors varied widely-from 2 to 60 minutes in a given 3-hour period. Patients' experience of a task's burden did not always correlate with the time spent on that task. CONCLUSION: The most burdensome tasks to patients with T2DM included negotiating health care services, affording medications, and completing administrative tasks even though they were not the most time-consuming activities. To be minimally disruptive, diabetes care should minimize the delegation of administrative tasks to patients.

Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiograms for identification of patients with low ejection fraction: a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial.

We have conducted a pragmatic clinical trial aimed to assess whether an electrocardiogram (ECG)-based, artificial intelligence (AI)-powered clinical decision support tool enables early diagnosis of low ejection fraction (EF), a condition that is underdiagnosed but treatable. In this trial ( NCT04000087 ), 120 primary care teams from 45 clinics or hospitals were cluster-randomized to either the intervention arm (access to AI results; 181 clinicians) or the control arm (usual care; 177 clinicians). ECGs were obtained as part of routine care from a total of 22,641 adults (N = 11,573 intervention; N = 11,068 control) without prior heart failure. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of low EF (≤50%) within 90 days of the ECG. The trial met the prespecified primary endpoint, demonstrating that the intervention increased the diagnosis of low EF in the overall cohort (1.6% in the control arm versus 2.1% in the intervention arm, odds ratio (OR) 1.32 (1.01-1.61), P = 0.007) and among those who were identified as having a high likelihood of low EF (that is, positive AI-ECG, 6% of the overall cohort) (14.5% in the control arm versus 19.5% in the intervention arm, OR 1.43 (1.08-1.91), P = 0.01). In the overall cohort, echocardiogram utilization was similar between the two arms (18.2% control versus 19.2% intervention, P = 0.17); for patients with positive AI-ECGs, more echocardiograms were obtained in the intervention compared to the control arm (38.1% control versus 49.6% intervention, P < 0.001). These results indicate that use of an AI algorithm based on ECGs can enable the early diagnosis of low EF in patients in the setting of routine primary care.

Batch enrollment for an artificial intelligence-guided intervention to lower neurologic events in patients with undiagnosed atrial fibrillation: rationale and design of a digital clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are a fundamental tool to evaluate medical interventions but are time-consuming and resource-intensive. OBJECTIVES: To build infrastructure for digital trials to improve efficiency and generalizability and test it using a study to validate an artificial intelligence algorithm to detect atrial fibrillation (AF). DESIGN: We will prospectively enroll 1,000 patients who underwent an electrocardiogram for any clinical reason in routine practice, do not have a previous diagnosis of AF or atrial flutter and would be eligible for anticoagulation if AF is detected. Eligible patients will be identified using digital phenotyping algorithms, including natural language processing that runs on the electronic health records. Study invitations will be sent in batches via patient portal or letter, which will direct patients to a website to verify eligibility, learn about the study (including video-based informed consent), and consent electronically. The method aims to enroll participants representative of the general patient population, rather than a convenience sample of patients presenting to clinic. A device will be mailed to patients to continuously monitor for up to 30 days. The primary outcome is AF diagnosis and burden; secondary outcomes include patients' experience with the trial conduct methods and the monitoring device. The enrollment, intervention, and follow-up will be conducted remotely, ie, a patient-centered site-less trial. SUMMARY: This is among the first wave of trials to adopt digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and other pragmatic features to create efficiencies, which will pave the way for future trials in a broad range of disease and treatment areas. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04208971.

Increasing risk-concordant cardiovascular care in diverse health systems: a mixed methods pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomized implementation trial of shared decision making (SDM4IP).

BACKGROUND: The primary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events is often less intense in persons at higher CV risk and vice versa. Clinical practice guidelines recommend that clinicians and patients use shared decision making (SDM) to arrive at an effective and feasible prevention plan that is congruent with each person's CV risk and informed preferences. However, SDM does not routinely happen in practice. This study aims to integrate into routine care an SDM decision tool (CV PREVENTION CHOICE) at three diverse healthcare systems in the USA and study strategies that foster its adoption and routine use. METHODS: This is a mixed method, hybrid type III stepped wedge cluster randomized study to estimate (a) the effectiveness of implementation strategies on SDM uptake and utilization and (b) the extent to which SDM results in prevention plans that are risk-congruent. Formative evaluation methods, including clinician and stakeholder interviews and surveys, will identify factors likely to impact feasibility, acceptability, and adoption of CV PREVENTION CHOICE as well as normalization of CV PREVENTION CHOICE in routine care. Implementation facilitation will be used to tailor implementation strategies to local needs, and implementation strategies will be systematically adjusted and tracked for assessment and refinement. Electronic health record data will be used to assess implementation and effectiveness outcomes, including CV PREVENTION CHOICE reach, adoption, implementation, maintenance, and effectiveness (measured as risk-concordant care plans). A sample of video-recorded clinical encounters and patient surveys will be used to assess fidelity. The study employs three theoretical approaches: a determinant framework that calls attention to categories of factors that may foster or inhibit implementation outcomes (the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research), an implementation theory that guides explanation or understanding of causal influences on implementation outcomes (Normalization Process Theory), and an evaluation framework (RE-AIM). DISCUSSION: By the project's end, we expect to have (a) identified the most effective implementation strategies to embed SDM in routine practice and (b) estimated the effectiveness of SDM to achieve feasible and risk-concordant CV prevention in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04450914 . Posted June 30, 2020 TRIAL STATUS: This study received ethics approval on April 17, 2020. The current trial protocol is version 2 (approved February 17, 2021). The first subject had not yet been enrolled at the time of submission.

Minimally disruptive medicine (MDM) in clinical practice: a qualitative case study of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinic care model.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests the need to reframe healthcare delivery for patients with chronic conditions, with emphasis on minimizing healthcare footprint/workload on patients, caregivers, clinicians and health systems through the proposed Minimally Disruptive Medicine (MDM) care model named. HIV care models have evolved to further focus on understanding barriers and facilitators to care delivery while improving patient-centered outcomes (e.g., disease progression, adherence, access, quality of life). It is hypothesized that these models may provide an example of MDM care model in clinic practice. Therefore, this study aimed to observe and ascertain MDM-concordant and discordant elements that may exist within a tertiary-setting HIV clinic care model for patients living with HIV or AIDS (PLWHA). We also aimed to identify lessons learned from this setting to inform improving the feasibility and usefulness of MDM care model. METHODS: This qualitative case study occurred in multidisciplinary HIV comprehensive-care clinic within an urban tertiary-medical center. Participants included Adult PLWHA and informal caregivers (e.g. family/friends) attending the clinic for regular appointments were recruited. All clinic staff were eligible for recruitment. Measurements included; semi-guided interviews with patients, caregivers, or both; semi-guided interviews with varied clinicians (individually); and direct observations of clinical encounters (patient-clinicians), as well as staff daily operations in 2015-2017. The qualitative-data synthesis used iterative, mainly inductive thematic coding. RESULTS: Researcher interviews and observations data included 28 patients, 5 caregivers, and 14 care-team members. With few exceptions, the clinic care model elements aligned closely to the MDM model of care through supporting patient capacity/abilities (with some patients receiving minimal social support and limited assistance with reframing their biography) and minimizing workload/demands (with some patients challenged by the clinic hours of operation). CONCLUSIONS: The studied HIV clinic incorporated many of the MDM tenants, contributing to its validation, and informing gaps in knowledge. While these findings may support the design and implementation of care that is both minimally disruptive and maximally supportive, the impact of MDM on patient-important outcomes and different care settings require further studying.

Determinants of Self-reported Health Outcomes in Adrenal Insufficiency: A Multisite Survey Study.

CONTEXT: Current evidence on determinants of adverse health outcomes in patients with adrenal insufficiency (AI) is scarce, especially in regards to AI subtypes. OBJECTIVE: To determine predictors of adverse outcomes in different subtypes of AI. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey study at 2 tertiary centers. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 696 patients with AI: primary AI (PAI, 42%), secondary AI (SAI, 32%), and glucocorticoid-induced AI (GIAI, 26%). INTERVENTION: Patient-centered questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' knowledge, self-management of AI, self-perceived health, and adverse outcomes. RESULTS: The incidence rate of adrenal crisis was 24/100 patient-years with 44% experiencing at least 1 adrenal crisis since diagnosis (59% in PAI vs 31% in SAI vs 37% in GIAI, P < .0001). All patients described high degrees of discomfort with self-management and receiving prompt treatment. Patients with PAI were most likely to develop adrenal crises (adjusted OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.9-4.0) despite reporting better self-perceived health (adjusted OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.1-5.3), understanding of their diagnosis (89% vs 74-81% in other subtypes, P = .002), higher comfort with self-management (62% vs 52-61% in other sub types, P = .005), and higher likelihood to receive prompt treatment for adrenal crises in the emergency department (42% vs 19-30% in other subtypes, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AI reported high degrees of discomfort with self-management and treatment delays when presenting with adrenal crises. Despite better self-perceived health and understanding of diagnosis, patients with PAI experienced the highest frequency of adrenal crises. A multidimensional educational effort is needed for patients and providers to improve the outcomes of all subtypes of AI.

Normalization of a conversation tool to promote shared decision making about anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation within a practical randomized trial of its effectiveness: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) implementation remains challenging. The factors that promote or hinder implementation of SDM tools for use during the consultation, including contextual factors such as clinician burnout and organizational support, remain unclear. We explored these factors in the context of a practical multicenter randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of an SDM conversation tool for patients with atrial fibrillation considering anticoagulation therapy. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we recruited clinicians who were regularly involved in conversations with patients regarding anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. Clinicians reported their characteristics and burnout symptoms using the two-item Maslach Burnout Inventory. Clinicians were trained in using the SDM tool, and they recorded their perceptions of the tool's normalization potential using the Normalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) survey instrument and verbally reflected on their answers to these survey questions. When possible, the training sessions and clinicians' verbal responses to the conversation tool were recorded. RESULTS: Our study comprised 183 clinicians recruited into the trial (168 with survey responses and 112 with recordings). Overall, clinicians gave high scores to the normalization potential of the intervention; they endorsed all domains of normalization to the same extent, regardless of site, clinician characteristics, or burnout ratings. In interviews, clinicians paid significant attention to making sense of the tool. Tool buy-in seemed to depend heavily on their ability to see the tool as accurate and "evidence-based" and their perceptions of having time in the consultation to use it. CONCLUSIONS: While time in the consultation remains a barrier, we did not find a significant association between burnout symptoms and normalization of an SDM conversation tool. Possible areas for improving the normalization of SDM conversation tools in clinical practice include enabling collaboration among clinicians to implement the tool and reporting how clinicians elsewhere use the tool. Direct measures of normalization (i.e., observing how often clinicians access the tool in practice outside of the clinical trial) may further elucidate the role that contextual factors, such as clinician burnout, play in the implementation of SDM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02905032. Registered on 9 September 2016.

ECG AI-Guided Screening for Low Ejection Fraction (EAGLE): Rationale and design of a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: A deep learning algorithm to detect low ejection fraction (EF) using routine 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) has recently been developed and validated. The algorithm was incorporated into the electronic health record (EHR) to automatically screen for low EF, encouraging clinicians to obtain a confirmatory transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) for previously undiagnosed patients, thereby facilitating early diagnosis and treatment. OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate a novel artificial intelligence (AI) screening tool for detecting low EF in primary care practices. DESIGN: The EAGLE trial is a pragmatic two-arm cluster randomized trial (NCT04000087) that will randomize >100 clinical teams (i.e., clusters) to either intervention (access to the new AI screening tool) or control (usual care) at 48 primary care practices across Minnesota and Wisconsin. The trial is expected to involve approximately 400 clinicians and 20,000 patients. The primary endpoint is newly discovered EF ≤50%. Eligible patients will include adults who undergo ECG for any reason and have not been previously diagnosed with low EF. Data will be pulled from the EHR, and no contact will be made with patients. A positive deviance qualitative study and a post-implementation survey will be conducted among select clinicians to identify facilitators and barriers to using the new screening report. SUMMARY: This trial will examine the effectiveness of the AI-enabled ECG for detection of asymptomatic low EF in routine primary care practices and will be among the first to prospectively evaluate the value of AI in real-world practice. Its findings will inform future implementation strategies for the translation of other AI-enabled algorithms.

Clinical trial design data for electrocardiogram artificial intelligence-guided screening for low ejection fraction (EAGLE).

The article details the materials that will be used in a clinical trial - ECG AI-Guided Screening for Low Ejection Fraction (EAGLE): Rationale and design of a pragmatic cluster randomized trial [1]. It includes a clinician-facing action recommendation report that will translate an artificial intelligence algorithm to routine practice and an alert when a positive screening result is found. This report was developed using a user-centered approach via an iterative process with input from multiple physician groups. Such data can be reused and adapted to translate other artificial intelligence algorithms. This article also includes data collection forms we developed for the clinical trial aiming to evaluate the artificial intelligence algorithm. Such materials can be adapted for other clinical trials.

Changing conversations in primary care for patients living with chronic conditions: pilot and feasibility study of the ICAN Discussion Aid.

PURPOSE: To pilot test the impact of the ICAN Discussion Aid on clinical encounters. METHODS: A pre-post study involving 11 clinicians and 100 patients was conducted at two primary care clinics within a single health system in the Midwest. The study examined clinicians' perceptions about ICAN feasibility, patients' and clinicians' perceptions about encounter success, videographic differences in encounter topics, and medication adherence 6 months after an ICAN encounter. RESULTS: 39/40 control encounters and 45/60 ICAN encounters yielded usable data. Clinicians reported ICAN use was feasible. In ICAN encounters, patients discussed diet, being active and taking medications more. Clinicians scored themselves poorer regarding visit success than their patients scored them; this effect was more pronounced in ICAN encounters. ICAN did not improve 6-month medication adherence or lengthen visits. CONCLUSION: This pilot study suggests that using ICAN in primary care is feasible, efficient and capable of modifying conversations. With lessons learned in this pilot, we are conducting a randomised trial of ICAN versus usual care in diverse clinical settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02390570.

Reflecting on shared decision making: A reflection-quantification study.

BACKGROUND: Reflecting ("stop-and-think") before rating may help patients consider the quality of shared decision making (SDM) and mitigate ceiling/halo effects that limit the performance of self-reported SDM measures. METHODS: We asked a diverse patient sample from the United States to reflect on their care before completing the 3-item CollaboRATE SDM measure. Study 1 focused on rephrasing CollaboRATE items to promote reflection before each item. Study 2 used 5 open-ended questions (about what went well and what could be improved upon, signs that the clinician understood the patient's situation, how the situation will be addressed, and why this treatment plan makes sense) to invite reflection before using the whole scale. A linear analogue scale assessed the extent to which the plan of care made sense to the patient. RESULTS: In Study 1, 107 participants completed surveys (84% response rate), 43 (40%) rated a clinical decision of which 27 (63%) after responding to reflection questions. Adding reflection lowered CollaboRATE scores ("less" SDM) and reduced the proportion of patients giving maximum (ceiling) scores (not statistically significant). In Study 2, 103 of 212 responders (49%) fully completed the version containing reflection questions. Reflection did not significantly change the distribution of CollaboRATE scores or of top scores. Participants indicated high scores on the sense of their care plan (mean 9.7 out of 10, SD 0.79). This rating was weakly correlated with total CollaboRATE scores (rho = .4, P = .0001). CONCLUSION: Reflection-before-quantification interventions may not improve the performance of patient-reported measures of SDM with substantial ceiling/halo effects.