Early Peanut Introduction in Primary Care: Evaluation of a Multicomponent Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a multicomponent intervention focused on early peanut introduction was associated with a lower peanut allergy incidence in young children. METHODS: The study cohort comprised all children born January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2018 receiving care at a large health care organization. Intervention activities occurred over 16 months and included provider educational programs, electronic health record tools, and new patient instructions. We used an interrupted time series design to assess whether peanut allergy incidence differed across 3 time periods (preintervention, interim, postintervention) among high- and low-risk children. The primary outcome was incident peanut allergy by age 24 months, defined as peanut allergy in the allergy field or active problem list plus a positive supportive test. Severe eczema and/or egg allergy presence defined high-risk. Because the study was conducted as part of routine care, it was not feasible to measure what counseling clinicians provided, or how and when parents fed their children peanut-containing foods. RESULTS: In a cohort of 22,571 children, the percent with peanut allergy by age 24 months was 17.3% (116 of 671) among high-risk and 0.8% (181 of 21,900) among low-risk children. In multivariate analyses, the adjusted peanut allergy rate per 100 person-years was not significantly different across study periods among high-risk (9.6 preintervention, 11.7 interim, and 9.9 postintervention, P = .70) or low-risk (0.5 preintervention, 0.7 interim, and 0.5 postintervention, P = .17) children. CONCLUSIONS: In a community-based setting, the incidence of peanut allergy did not decline following a multicomponent intervention focused on early peanut introduction.

Commitment to Change Statements and Actual Practice Change After a Continuing Medical Education Intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Continuing medical education (CME) interventions often evaluate participant commitment to change (CTC) clinical practice. Evidence linking CTC to actual practice change is limited. METHODS: In an intervention that combined live CME with changes to the electronic health record to promote judicious antibiotic use for children with urinary tract infections (UTIs), we evaluated CTC and subsequent prescribing behavior in Kaiser Permanente Colorado, an integrated health care system. CTC was assessed immediately after the session using closed-ended questions about session learning objectives and open-ended questions to elicit specific practice changes. Perceived barriers to implementing recommended changes were also assessed. RESULTS: Among 179 participants, 80 (45%) completed postsession evaluations and treated one or more child with a UTI in the subsequent 17 months (856 UTIs in total). In closed-ended responses about session learning objectives, 45 clinicians (56%) committed to changing practice for antibiotic choice and duration, whereas 37 (46%) committed to implementing new practice guidelines. When asked open-ended questions to identify specific practice changes, 32 (40%) committed to antibiotic choice change and 29 (36%) committed to treatment duration change. Participants who made specific CTC statements had greater improvement in antibiotic choice (relative rate ratio 1.56, 95% CI 1.16-2.09) and duration (relative rate ratio 1.59, 95% CI 1.05-2.41) than participants who did not make specific commitments. Few perceived barriers affected subsequent prescribing. DISCUSSION: Commitments to changing specific clinical behaviors were associated with sustained changes in prescribing for children with UTIs. Linking self-evaluations with clinical data in integrated health care systems is an important tool for CME evaluators.

Improving Antibiotic Prescribing for Pediatric Urinary Tract Infections in Outpatient Settings.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a multicomponent intervention was associated with increased use of first-line antibiotics (cephalexin or sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim) among children with uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) in outpatient settings. METHODS: The study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Colorado, a large health care organization with ∼127 000 members <18 years of age. After conducting a gap analysis, an intervention was developed to target key drivers of antibiotic prescribing for pediatric UTIs. Intervention activities included development of new local clinical guidelines, a live case-based educational session, pre- and postsession e-mailed knowledge assessments, and a new UTI-specific order set within the electronic health record. Most activities were implemented on April 26, 2017. The study design was an interrupted time series comparing antibiotic prescribing for UTIs before versus after the implementation date. Infants <60 days old and children with complex urologic or neurologic conditions were excluded. RESULTS: During January 2014 to September 2018, 2142 incident outpatient UTIs were identified (1636 preintervention and 506 postintervention). Pyelonephritis was diagnosed for 7.6% of cases. Adjusted for clustering of UTIs within clinicians, the proportion of UTIs treated with first-line antibiotics increased from 43.4% preintervention to 62.4% postintervention (P < .0001). The use of cephalexin (first-line, narrow spectrum) increased from 28.9% preintervention to 53.0% postintervention (P < .0001). The use of cefixime (second-line, broad spectrum) decreased from 17.3% preintervention to 2.6% postintervention (P < .0001). Changes in prescribing practices persisted through the end of the study period. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent intervention with educational and process-improvement elements was associated with a sustained change in antibiotic prescribing for uncomplicated pediatric UTIs.

Implementation of Recommendations for Long-Acting Contraception Among Women Aged 13 to 18 Years in Primary Care.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical specialty societies recommend long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) as first-line contraception for adolescent women. We evaluated whether a combined educational and process improvement intervention enhanced LARC placement in primary care within an integrated health care system. METHODS: The intervention included journal clubs, live continuing education, point-of-care guidelines, and new patient materials. We conducted a retrospective cohort study across 3 time periods: baseline (January 2013-September 2015), early implementation (October 2015-March 2016), and full implementation (April 2016-June 2017). The primary outcome was the proportion of LARCs placed by primary care clinicians among women aged 13 to 18 years compared with gynecology clinicians. RESULTS: Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado cared for approximately 20,000 women aged 13 to 18 years in each calendar quarter between 2013 and 2017. Overall, LARC placement increased from 7.0 per 1000 members per quarter at baseline to 13.0 per 1000 during the full intervention. Primary care clinicians placed 6.2% of all LARCs in 2013, increasing to 32.1% by 2017 (P < .001), including 45.5% of contraceptive implants. Clinicians who attended educational sessions were more likely to adopt LARCs than those who did not (17.9% vs 6.4% respectively, P = .009). Neither overall LARC placement rates (relative risk, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-5.6) nor contraceptive implant rates (relative risk, 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-9.8) increased significantly in clinicians who attended educational activities. CONCLUSIONS: This multimodal intervention was associated with increased LARC placement for adolescent women in primary care. The combination of education and process improvement is a promising strategy to promote clinician behavior change.

Device Therapies Among Patients Receiving Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in the Cardiovascular Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in selected patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction by delivering therapies (antitachycardia pacing or shocks) to terminate potentially lethal arrhythmias; inappropriate therapies also occur. We assessed device therapies among adults receiving primary prevention ICDs in 7 healthcare systems. METHODS AND RESULTS: We linked medical record data, adjudicated device therapies, and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Survival analysis evaluated therapy probability and predictors after ICD implant from 2006 to 2009, with attention to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups: left ventricular ejection fraction, 31% to 35%; nonischemic cardiomyopathy <9 months' duration; and New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator. Among 2540 patients, 35% were <65 years old, 26% were women, and 59% were white. During 27 (median) months, 738 (29%) received ≥1 therapy. Three-year therapy risk was 36% (appropriate, 24%; inappropriate, 12%). Appropriate therapy was more common in men (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-2.35). Inappropriate therapy was more common in patients with atrial fibrillation (adjusted HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.68-2.87), but less common among patients ≥65 years old versus younger (adjusted HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95) and in recent implants (eg, in 2009 versus 2006; adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.95). In Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development analysis, inappropriate therapy was less common with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator versus single chamber (adjusted HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.84); therapy risk did not otherwise differ for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this community cohort of primary prevention patients receiving ICD, therapy delivery varied across demographic and clinical characteristics, but did not differ meaningfully for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups.

Comparison of Inappropriate Shocks and Other Health Outcomes Between Single- and Dual-Chamber Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators for Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: Results From the Cardiovascular Research Network Longitudinal Study of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: In US clinical practice, many patients who undergo placement of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death receive dual-chamber devices. The superiority of dual-chamber over single-chamber devices in reducing the risk of inappropriate ICD shocks in clinical practice has not been established. The objective of this study was to compare risk of adverse outcomes, including inappropriate shocks, between single- and dual-chamber ICDs for primary prevention. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified patients receiving a single- or dual-chamber ICD for primary prevention who did not have an indication for pacing from 15 hospitals within 7 integrated health delivery systems in the Longitudinal Study of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators from 2006 to 2009. The primary outcome was time to first inappropriate shock. ICD shocks were adjudicated for appropriateness. Other outcomes included all-cause hospitalization, heart failure hospitalization, and death. Patient, clinician, and hospital-level factors were accounted for using propensity score weighting methods. Among 1042 patients without pacing indications, 54.0% (n=563) received a single-chamber device and 46.0% (n=479) received a dual-chamber device. In a propensity-weighted analysis, device type was not significantly associated with inappropriate shock (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-1.38 [P=0.65]), all-cause hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.21 [P=0.76]), heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.21 [P=0.59]), or death (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.53 [P=0.17]). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who received an ICD for primary prevention without indications for pacing, dual-chamber devices were not associated with lower risk of inappropriate shock or differences in hospitalization or death compared with single-chamber devices. This study does not justify the use of dual-chamber devices to minimize inappropriate shocks.

Age and sex differences in long-term outcomes following implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement in contemporary clinical practice: findings from the Cardiovascular Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Patient sex and age may influence rates of death after receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for primary prevention. Differences in outcomes other than mortality and whether these differences vary by heart failure symptoms, etiology, and left ventricular ejection fraction are not well characterized. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 2954 patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤0.35 undergoing first-time implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for primary prevention within the Cardiovascular Research Network; 769 patients (26%) were women, and 2827 (62%) were aged >65 years. In a median follow-up of 2.4 years, outcome rates per 1000 patient-years were 109 for death, 438 for hospitalization, and 111 for heart failure hospitalizations. Procedure-related complications occurred in 8.36%. In multivariable models, women had significantly lower risks of death (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.80) and heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98) and higher risks for complications (hazard ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.90) than men; patients aged >65 years had higher risks of death (hazard ratio 1.55, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.86) and heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio 1.25, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.49) than younger patients. Age and sex differences were generally consistent in strata according to symptoms, etiology, and severity of left ventricular systolic dysfunction, except the higher risk of complications in women, which differed by New York Heart Association classification (P=0.03 for sex-New York Heart Association interaction), and the risk of heart failure hospitalization in older patients, which differed by etiology of heart failure (P=0.05 for age-etiology interaction). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of adverse outcomes after receipt of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for primary prevention is substantial and varies according to patient age and sex. These differences in outcome generally do not vary according to baseline heart failure characteristics.

Longitudinal study of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: methods and clinical characteristics of patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention in contemporary practice.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are increasingly used for primary prevention after randomized, controlled trials demonstrating that they reduce the risk of death in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The extent to which the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of unselected, community-based patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation in a real-world setting compare with those enrolled in the randomized, controlled trials is not well characterized. This study is being conducted to address these questions. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study cohort includes consecutive patients undergoing primary prevention ICD placement between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009 in 7 health plans. Baseline clinical characteristics were acquired from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Longitudinal data collection is underway, and will include hospitalization, mortality, and resource use from standardized health plan data archives. Data regarding ICD therapies will be obtained through chart abstraction and adjudicated by a panel of experts in device therapy. Compared with the populations of primary prevention ICD therapy randomized, controlled trials, the cohort (n=2621) is on average significantly older (by 2.5-6.5 years), more often female, more often from racial and ethnic minority groups, and has a higher burden of coexisting conditions. The cohort is similar, however, to a national population undergoing primary prevention ICD placement. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation in this study differ from those enrolled in the randomized, controlled trials that established the efficacy of ICDs. Understanding a broad range of health outcomes, including ICD therapies, will provide patients, clinicians, and policy makers with contemporary data to inform decision-making.