Synopsis of the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline: The Diagnosis and Management of Hypertension in the Primary Care Setting.

DESCRIPTION: In January 2020, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a joint clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of hypertension in the primary care setting. METHODS: The VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group convened a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included a multidisciplinary panel of practicing clinician stakeholders and conformed to the Institute of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions in collaboration with the ECRI Institute, which systematically searched and evaluated the literature from 15 December 2013 to 25 March 2019 and developed and rated recommendations by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. RECOMMENDATIONS: This synopsis summarizes key features of the guideline in several key areas: the measurement of blood pressure, the definition of hypertension, target treatment goals, and nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment of essential and resistant hypertension.

Effect of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Systematic Review Prepared for the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials suggest that treating patients with hypertension to lower blood pressure (BP) targets improves cardiovascular outcomes. PURPOSE: To summarize the effects of intensive (or targeted) systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) lowering with pharmacologic treatment on cardiovascular outcomes and harms in adults with hypertension. DATA SOURCES: Multiple databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched for relevant systematic reviews (SRs) published in English from 15 December 2013 through 25 March 2019, with updated targeted searches through 8 January 2020. STUDY SELECTION: 8 SRs of randomized controlled trials examining either a standardized SBP target of -10 mm Hg (1 SR) or BP lowering below a target threshold (7 SRs). DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, assessed study quality, and performed GRADE assessments; a second investigator checked abstractions and assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS: The main outcome of interest was reduction in composite cardiovascular outcomes. High-strength evidence showed benefit of a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes among patients with hypertension in the general population, patients with chronic kidney disease, and patients with heart failure. Evidence on reducing SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (moderate strength) or diabetes mellitus (high strength) to a lower SBP target was mixed. Low-strength evidence supported intensive lowering to a 10-mm Hg reduction in SBP for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a history of stroke. All reported harms were considered, including general adverse events, serious adverse events, cognitive impairment, fractures, falls, syncope, hypotension, withdrawals due to adverse events, and acute kidney injury. Safety results were mixed or inconclusive. LIMITATIONS: This was a qualitative synthesis of new evidence with existing meta-analyses. Data were sparse for outcomes related to treating DBP to a lower target or for patients older than 60 years. CONCLUSION: Overall, current clinical literature supports intensive BP lowering in patients with hypertension for improving cardiovascular outcomes. In most subpopulations, intensive lowering was favored over less-intensive lowering, but the data were less clear for patients with diabetes mellitus or cardiovascular disease. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration.

The Management of Chronic Insomnia Disorder and Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Synopsis of the 2019 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Description: In September 2019, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) approved a new joint clinical practice guideline for assessing and managing patients with chronic insomnia disorder and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). This guideline is intended to give health care teams a framework by which to screen, evaluate, treat, and manage the individual needs and preferences of VA and DoD patients with either of these conditions. Methods: In October 2017, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group initiated a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the Institute of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions, systematically searched and evaluated the literature, created three 1-page algorithms, and advanced 41 recommendations using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. Recommendations: This synopsis summarizes the key recommendations of the guideline in 3 areas: diagnosis and assessment of OSA and chronic insomnia disorder, treatment and management of OSA, and treatment and management of chronic insomnia disorder. Three clinical practice algorithms are also included.

The Optimal Length of Stay Associated With the Lowest Readmission Risk Following Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Index length of stay (LOS) and readmissions are viewed as important quality measures. However, these metrics represent competing demands as an inordinate reduction in LOS may lead to unplanned readmissions. We sought to assess the optimal LOS associated with the lowest 90-d readmission rate following discharge after common surgical procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study relying on Tricare claims. We identified all eligible adult patients (18-64 y) receiving a series of common surgical procedures between 2006 and 2014. We used a generalized additive model with spline regression to determine the optimal LOS associated with the lowest 90-d risk of readmission. RESULTS: Ninety-day readmission rates varied from 6.03% to 34.69%. Most procedures exhibited a logit linear relationship, with the lowest risk of readmission evident on postoperative day-1 and increasing thereafter. Among the more invasive procedures (e.g., esophagectomy and radical cystectomy), a U-shaped relationship was realized, indicating that expedited discharge would increase the potential for readmission as would any extended hospital LOS. For these procedures, the ideal index LOS appeared to be 6-7 d for radical cystectomy and 12-13 d for esophagectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the practice of discharging patients as soon as clinically feasible after hip and knee arthroplasty, lumbar spine surgery, hernia repair, appendectomy, nephrectomy, and colectomy. Among esophagectomy or radical cystectomy, there is a well-defined optimal index admission period and discharge outside this window appears to be detrimental. Our results suggest that invasive procedures appear to possess a unique "signature" when it comes to optimal LOS.

Understanding Human Error in Naval Aviation Mishaps.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the external factors that influence the performance and decisions of aviators involved in Naval aviation mishaps. BACKGROUND: Mishaps in complex activities, ranging from aviation to nuclear power operations, are often the result of interactions between multiple components within an organization. The Naval aviation mishap database contains relevant information, both in quantitative statistics and qualitative reports, that permits analysis of such interactions to identify how the working atmosphere influences aviator performance and judgment. METHOD: Results from 95 severe Naval aviation mishaps that occurred from 2011 through 2016 were analyzed using Bayes' theorem probability formula. Then a content analysis was performed on a subset of relevant mishap reports. RESULTS: Out of the 14 latent factors analyzed, the Bayes' application identified 6 that impacted specific aspects of aviator behavior during mishaps. Technological environment, misperceptions, and mental awareness impacted basic aviation skills. The remaining 3 factors were used to inform a content analysis of the contextual information within mishap reports. Teamwork failures were the result of plan continuation aggravated by diffused responsibility. Resource limitations and risk management deficiencies impacted judgments made by squadron commanders. CONCLUSION: The application of Bayes' theorem to historical mishap data revealed the role of latent factors within Naval aviation mishaps. Teamwork failures were seen to be considerably damaging to both aviator skill and judgment. APPLICATION: Both the methods and findings have direct application for organizations interested in understanding the relationships between external factors and human error. It presents real-world evidence to promote effective safety decisions.

Global Health Engagement and The Department of Defense as a Vehicle for Security and Sustainable Global Health.

The Unites States Department of Defense (DoD) is viewed by many in the general public as a monolithic government entity whose primary purpose is to coordinate this country's ability to make war and maintain a military presence around the world. However, the DoD is in fact a multidimensional organization whose global impact is as expansive as it is varying and is responsible for far-reaching global health interventions. The United States has worked toward providing long-term care among host nation populations by providing training in several areas related to medicine, with positive results. These efforts can be built upon with substantial positive effects. Building health infrastructure and capacity around the world is essential. The DoD is the most generously funded agency in the world, and the resources at its disposal provide the opportunity to make great gains in the long term in terms of both health and security worldwide. With efficient and careful use of DoD resources, and partnerships with key non-governmental organizations with specialized knowledge and great passion, partnerships can be forged with communities around the world to ensure that public health is achieved in even the most underserved communities. A move toward creating sustainable health systems with long-term goals and measurable outcomes is an essential complement to the already successful disaster and emergency relief that the United States military already provides. By ensuring that communities around the world are both provided with access to the sustainable health care they need and that emergency situations can be responded to in an efficient way, the United States can serve its duty as a leader in sharing expertise and resources for the betterment and security of all humankind.

Lipid Management Guidelines from the Departments of Veteran Affairs and Defense: A Critique.

In December 2014, the US Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense (VA/DoD) published an independent clinical practice guideline for the management of dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disease risk, adding to the myriad of recently published guidelines on this topic. The VA/DoD guidelines differ from major US guidelines published by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association in 2013 in the following ways: recommending moderate-intensity statins for the majority of patients with statin indications regardless of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk; advocating for limited on-treatment lipid monitoring; and deemphasizing ancillary data, such as coronary artery calcium testing, to improve atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk estimation. In the context of manifold treatment recommendations from numerous guideline committees, the VA/DoD recommendations may generate further confusion and mixed messages among healthcare providers about the optimal treatment of dyslipidemia. In this review, we critically appraise the VA/DoD recommendations with a focus on the evidence base for each area where the VA/DoD guidelines differ from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. We also call for harmonization of lipid treatment guidelines to ensure high-quality and consistent care for patients with, and at risk for, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Pharmacotherapy of traumatic brain injury: state of the science and the road forward: report of the Department of Defense Neurotrauma Pharmacology Workgroup.

Despite substantial investments by government, philanthropic, and commercial sources over the past several decades, traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains an unmet medical need and a major source of disability and mortality in both developed and developing societies. The U.S. Department of Defense neurotrauma research portfolio contains more than 500 research projects funded at more than $700 million and is aimed at developing interventions that mitigate the effects of trauma to the nervous system and lead to improved quality of life outcomes. A key area of this portfolio focuses on the need for effective pharmacological approaches for treating patients with TBI and its associated symptoms. The Neurotrauma Pharmacology Workgroup was established by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC) with the overarching goal of providing a strategic research plan for developing pharmacological treatments that improve clinical outcomes after TBI. To inform this plan, the Workgroup (a) assessed the current state of the science and ongoing research and (b) identified research gaps to inform future development of research priorities for the neurotrauma research portfolio. The Workgroup identified the six most critical research priority areas in the field of pharmacological treatment for persons with TBI. The priority areas represent parallel efforts needed to advance clinical care; each requires independent effort and sufficient investment. These priority areas will help the USAMRMC and other funding agencies strategically guide their research portfolios to ensure the development of effective pharmacological approaches for treating patients with TBI.