A Hybrid Effectiveness/Implementation Clinical Trial of Adherence to Long-Term Oxygen Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Rationale: Interventions to promote adherence to long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are needed. Objectives: To examine the real-world effectiveness of phone-based peer coaching on LTOT adherence and other outcomes in a pragmatic trial of patients with COPD. Methods: In a hybrid effectiveness/implementation pragmatic trial, patients were randomized to receive phone-based proactive coaching (educational materials, five phone-based peer coaching sessions over 60 d), reactive coaching (educational materials, peer coaching when requested), or usual care. Study staff members collected baseline and outcome data via phone at 30, 60, and 90 days after randomization. Adherence to LTOT over 60 days, the primary effectiveness outcome, was defined as mean LTOT use ⩾17.7 h/d. LTOT use was calculated using information about home oxygen equipment use in worksheets completed by study participants. Comparisons of adherence to LTOT between each coaching group and the usual care group using multivariable logistic regression models were prespecified as the primary analyses. Secondary effectiveness outcomes included Patient Reported Outcome Management Information System measures for physical, emotional, and social health. We assessed early implementation domains in the reach, adoption, and implementation framework. Results: In 444 participants, the proportions who were adherent to LTOT at 60 days were 74% in usual care, 84% in reactive coaching, and 70% in proactive coaching groups. Although reach, adoption by stakeholder partners, and intervention fidelity were acceptable, complete LTOT adherence data were available in only 73% of participants. Reactive coaching (adjusted odds ratio, 1.77; 97.5% confidence interval, 0.80-3.90) and proactive coaching (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70; 97.5% confidence interval, 0.34-1.46) did not improve adherence to LTOT compared with usual care. However, proactive coaching significantly reduced depressive symptoms and sleep disturbance compared with usual care and reduced depressive symptoms compared with reactive coaching. Unexpectedly, LTOT adherence was significantly lower in the proactive compared with the reactive coaching group. Conclusions: The results were inconclusive about whether a phone-based peer coaching strategy changed LTOT adherence compared with usual care. Further studies are needed to confirm the potential benefits of proactive peer coaching on secondary effectiveness outcomes and differences in LTOT adherence between proactive and reactive peer coaching. Clinical trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02098369).

Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Improve Patient Experience Among Adults During Transitions from Hospital to Home: the PArTNER study.

INTRODUCTION: Minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) need evidence-based strategies tailored to the populations they serve to improve patient-centered outcomes after hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial (RCT) from October 2014 to January 2017 at a MSH comparing the effectiveness of a stakeholder-supported Navigator intervention vs. Usual care on post-hospital patient experience, outcomes, and healthcare utilization. Community health workers and peer coaches delivered the intervention which included (1) in-hospital visits to assess barriers to health/healthcare and to develop a personalized Discharge Patient Education Tool (DPET); (2) a home visit to review the DPET; and (3) telephone-based peer coaching. The co-primary outcomes were between-group comparisons of 30-day changes in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures of anxiety and informational support (minimum important difference is 2 to 5 units change); a p-value <0.025 was considered significant using intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included death, ED visits, or readmissions and measures of emotional, social, and physical health at 30 and 60 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 1029 adults hospitalized with heart failure (28%), pneumonia (22%), MI (10%), COPD (11%), or sickle cell disease (29%). Over 80% were non-Hispanic Black. Overall, there were no significant between-group differences in the 30-day change in anxiety (adjusted difference: -1.6, 97.5% CI -3.3 to 0.1, p=0.03), informational support (adjusted difference: -0.01, 97.5% CI -2.0 to 1.9, p=0.99), or any secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses suggested the Navigator intervention improved anxiety among participants with COPD, a primary care provider, a hospitalization in the past 12 months, or higher baseline anxiety; among participants without health insurance, the intervention improved informational support (all p-values <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic RCT at a MSH, the Navigator intervention did not improve post-hospital anxiety, informational support, or other outcomes compared to Usual care. Benefits observed in participant subgroups should be confirmed in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02114515.

Design of a pragmatic trial in minority children presenting to the emergency department with uncontrolled asthma: The CHICAGO Plan.

Among children with asthma, black children are two to four times as likely to have an emergency department (ED) visit and die from asthma, respectively, compared to white children in the United States. Despite the availability of evidence-based asthma management guidelines, minority children are less likely than white children to receive or use effective options for asthma care. The CHICAGO Plan is a three-arm multi-center randomized pragmatic trial of children 5 to 11years old presenting to the ED with uncontrolled asthma that compares: [1] an ED-focused intervention to improve the quality of care on discharge to home, [2] the same ED-focused intervention together with a home-based community health worker (CHW)-led intervention, and [3] enhanced usual care. All children receive spacers for the metered dose inhaler and teaching about its use. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Asthma Impact Scale and Satisfaction with Participation in Social Roles at 6months are the primary outcomes in children and in caregivers, respectively. Other patient-reported outcomes and indicators of healthcare utilization are assessed as secondary outcomes. Innovative features of the CHICAGO Plan include early and continuous engagement of children, caregivers, the Chicago Department of Public Health, and other stakeholders to inform the design and implementation of the study and a shared research infrastructure to coordinate study activities. The objective of this report is to describe the development of the CHICAGO Plan, including the methods and rationale for engaging stakeholders, the shared research infrastructure, and other features of the pragmatic clinical trial design.

Evaluation and Documentation of Supplemental Oxygen Requirements is Rarely Performed in Patients Hospitalized With COPD.

Rationale: Patients hospitalized with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who require supplemental oxygen (O2) are at increased risk of hospital readmissions. There is a paucity of information regarding quality of evaluation and documentation regarding the need for supplemental O2 in this population.  Objective: To determine the extent to which evaluation and documentation regarding the need for supplemental O2 occurs prior to hospital discharge in patients with COPD.  Methods: We conducted a two-center retrospective cohort study of hospitalized adults with a physician diagnosis of COPD.  We reviewed electronic health records to ascertain whether patients underwent evaluation beyond rest oximetry documenting hypoxemia and if there was adequate documentation of supplemental O2 requirements prior to discharge. Results:  Of 526 patients hospitalized with a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis of COPD, 335 patients (mean age 69 years, 78% with diagnosis of COPD exacerbation) met eligibility criteria. Overall, 1 in 5 (22%, 73/335) hospitalized patients with COPD had an evaluation beyond rest oximetry for supplemental O2 requirements during admission.  Adequate documentation of supplemental O2 requirements occurred in even fewer patients (16%, 54/335). Both evaluation (26% versus 5%, p=0.002) and documentation (19% versus 4%, p=0.001) of supplemental O2 requirements were more common in patients hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation compared to those hospitalized with COPD but without an exacerbation. Conclusions: Evaluation and documentation of supplemental O2 requirements beyond rest oximetry occur infrequently in patients hospitalized with COPD.