RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Voice-assisted artificial intelligence-based systems may streamline clinical care among patients with heart failure (HF) and caregivers; however, randomized clinical trials are needed. We evaluated the potential for Amazon Alexa (Alexa), a voice-assisted artificial intelligence-based system, to conduct screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a HF clinic. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 52 participants (patients and caregivers) from a HF clinic who were randomly assigned with a subsequent cross-over to receive a SARS-CoV-2 screening questionnaire via Alexa or health care personnel. The primary outcome was overall response concordance, as measured by the percentage of agreement and unweighted kappa scores between groups. A postscreening survey evaluated comfort with using the artificial intelligence-based device. In total, 36 participants (69%) were male, the median age was 51 years (range 34-65 years) years and 36 (69%) were English speaking. Twenty-one participants (40%) were patients with HF. For the primary outcome, there were no statistical differences between the groups: Alexa-research coordinator group 96.9% agreement and unweighted kappa score of 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.84-1.00) vs research coordinator-Alexa group 98.5% agreement and unweighted kappa score of 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.88-1.00) (P value for all comparisons > .05). Overall, 87% of participants rated their screening experience as good or outstanding. CONCLUSIONS: Alexa demonstrated comparable performance to a health care professional for SARS-CoV-2 screening in a group of patients with HF and caregivers and may represent an attractive approach to symptom screening in this population. Future studies evaluating such technologies for other uses among patients with HF and caregivers are warranted. NCT04508972.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Therapies can reduce the risk of heart failure (HF) development and progression in type 2 diabetes; nevertheless, the risk of these outcomes is greater in females than in males. METHODS AND RESULTS: To investigate sex differences in HF development and progression, we compared baseline circulating proteins (Olink Cardiovascular II panel) in males and females with type 2 diabetes and recent acute coronary syndrome for the outcome of HF hospitalization. Data were from the placebo-controlled Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes with Alogliptin vs Standard of Care (EXAMINE) trial. Pathophysiological sex-differences were interpreted with network and pathway over-representation analyses. The EXAMINE trial enrolled 5380 participants (32.1% females) with biomarker data available for 95.4% of individuals. Analyses revealed 43 biomarkers were differentially expressed in HF hospitalization, of which 18 were sex specific. Among these 43 biomarkers, interleukin-6 was identified as a central node for the pathogenesis of HF hospitalization in both females and in males. Additional pathway over-representation analyses demonstrated that biomarkers associated with inflammatory pathways related to endothelial dysfunction and cardiac fibrosis were more up-regulated in females than males with HF hospitalization. Differential expression of 3 biomarkers (pentraxin-related protein 3, hydroxyacid oxidase 1, and carbonic anhydrase 5A) was independently associated with an increased risk of HF hospitalization in females but not in males (interaction P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In males and females with type 2 diabetes and acute coronary syndrome, interleukin-6 seems to be central in the pathogenesis of HF. Females exhibit higher levels of circulating proteins related to immunological pathways, reflecting sex-specific differences underlying HF development and progression.
RESUMEN
AIMS: The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure (HF) in Diabetes (TRS-HFDM ) prognosticates HF hospitalization in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to externally validate and extend its use for those with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The TRS-HFDM was externally validated in the Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes with Alogliptin versus Standard of Care (EXAMINE) trial (n = 5380) and extended with natriuretic biomarkers. Missing data were multiply imputed. Initial TRS-HFDM variables were previous HF (2 points), atrial fibrillation (1 point), coronary artery disease (1 point), estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (1 point), and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30-300 mg/g (1 point) and >300 mg/g (2 points). RESULTS: In total, HF hospitalization occurred in 193 (3.6%) patients. Based on the TRS-HFDM , 25% of patients were classified as intermediate risk (1 point), 30% were classified as high risk (2 points), 19% were classified as very-high risk (3 points) and 26% were classified as severe risk (≥4 points). Before model extension, discrimination (C-index 0.76, 95%·CI 0.73-0.80) and calibration (calibration slope 0.82, 95%·CI 0.65-1.0; calibration-in-the-large -0.15, 95%·CI -0.37-0.64) were moderate-to-good in individuals with T2D and recent ACS. The extension of TRS-HFDM with the addition of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-ProBNP) improved discrimination (C-index 0.82, 95%·CI 0.79-0.85) and calibration (calibration slope 0.84, 95%·CI 0.66-1.02; calibration-in-the-large -0.12, 95%·CI -0.33-0.081) for this higher-risk population. CONCLUSION: The TRS-HFDM with the extension of NT-ProBNP improves risk stratification and generalizes the use of the risk score for patients with T2D and ACS. Future validation studies in ACS populations may be warranted.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Humanos , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/complicaciones , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Factores de Riesgo , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We used data from people initially free of clinical cardiovascular disease to evaluate the association between metabolic syndrome (MS) and incident preclinical heart failure (pHF). METHODS AND RESULTS: STANISLAS was a familial, single-center, longitudinal prospective cohort study composed of 1,006 families from Nancy, France (median follow-up, 17 years [1993-2016]). Age- and sex-adjusted logistic regression and inverse probability weighting models were used to evaluate the association between MS and pHF, which was defined by diastolic dysfunction, atrial enlargement, ventricular hypertrophy, or elevated natriuretic peptides. Among 944 people who were adults at the first and final visit, those with baseline MS were more likely to be older (63 vs. 61 vs. 59 years of age) and male (73% vs. 55% vs. 45%) compared to people who developed incident MS and people who had no baseline MS, respectively. Furthermore, compared to people without baseline MS, the risk of pHF was numerically larger among people with baseline MS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.27, 95% CI: 1.07-4.81) and people who developed incident MS (aOR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.00-2.43). Concerning the metabolic determinants of MS, the risk of pHF was most elevated in people with baseline hypertension (aOR 3.19, 95% CI: 1.80-5.63) and elevated waist circumference (aOR 2.59, 95% CI: 1.47-4.57). CONCLUSION: Overall, HF is an important public health concern given the high risk of mortality when patients with MS or elevated fasting glucose become established with the disease. Early aggressive lifestyle modification and medical intervention among patients free of cardiovascular disease with an obese-hypertensive phenotype may be warranted to prevent HF development.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Hipertensión , Síndrome Metabólico , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios de Seguimiento , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Humanos , Hipertensión/complicaciones , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Masculino , Síndrome Metabólico/complicaciones , Síndrome Metabólico/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The current care model of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and its complications appears to be "asynchronous" with patient care divided by specialty. This model is associated with low use of guideline-directed medical therapies. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of integrated care models has been well described in the management of patients with T2D; this usually includes an endocrinologist coupled with a nutritionist and nurse. However, physician-based care models are largely "asynchronous," whereby the patient requires multiple different siloed specialties to manage their health care. To date, there has been limited exploration of synchronous care delivery, i.e., whereby multi-comorbid patients with T2D are seen simultaneously by health care providers from endocrinology, cardiology, and nephrology to optimize use of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT). Given the rising complexity of patients with T2D, further research is needed on the role of synchronous health care delivery in optimizing the use of GDMT and improving patient outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Sistema Cardiovascular , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Comorbilidad , Atención a la Salud , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , HumanosRESUMEN
Background. Opioids contribute to more than 60 000 deaths annually in North America. While the expansion of overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs has been recommended in response to the opioid crisis, their effectiveness remains unclear. Objectives. To conduct an umbrella review of systematic reviews to provide a broad-based conceptual scheme of the effect and feasibility of OEND and to identify areas for possible optimization. Search Methods. We conducted the umbrella review of systematic reviews by searching PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the reference lists of relevant articles. Briefly, an academic librarian used a 2-concept search, which included opioid subject headings and relevant keywords with a modified PubMed systematic review filter. Selection Criteria. Eligible systematic reviews described comprehensive search strategies and inclusion and exclusion criteria, evaluated the quality or risk of bias of included studies, were published in English or French, and reported data relevant to either the safety or effectiveness of OEND programs, or optimal strategies for the management of opioid overdose with naloxone in out-of-hospital settings. Data Collection and Analysis. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and the quality of included reviews was assessed in duplicate with AMSTAR-2, a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews. Review quality was rated critically low, low, moderate, or high based on 7 domains: protocol registration, literature search adequacy, exclusion criteria, risk of bias assessment, meta-analytical methods, result interpretation, and presence of publication bias. Summary tables were constructed, and confidence ratings were provided for each outcome by using a previously modified version of the Royal College of General Practitioners' clinical guidelines. Main Results. Six systematic reviews containing 87 unique studies were included. We found that OEND programs produce long-term knowledge improvement regarding opioid overdose, improve participants' attitudes toward naloxone, provide sufficient training for participants to safely and effectively manage overdoses, and effectively reduce opioid-related mortality. High-concentration intranasal naloxone (> 2 mg/mL) was as effective as intramuscular naloxone at the same dose, whereas lower-concentration intranasal naloxone was less effective. Evidence was limited for other naloxone formulations, as well as the need for hospital transport after overdose reversal. The preponderance of evidence pertained persons who use heroin. Author's Conclusions. Evidence suggests that OEND programs are effective for reducing opioid-related mortality; however, additional high-quality research is required to optimize program delivery. Public Health Implications. Community-based OEND programs should be implemented widely in high-risk populations.
Asunto(s)
Educación en Salud , Naloxona , Antagonistas de Narcóticos , Sobredosis de Opiáceos , Salud Pública , Humanos , Naloxona/administración & dosificación , Naloxona/uso terapéutico , Antagonistas de Narcóticos/administración & dosificación , Antagonistas de Narcóticos/uso terapéutico , Sobredosis de Opiáceos/tratamiento farmacológico , Sobredosis de Opiáceos/mortalidad , Revisiones Sistemáticas como AsuntoRESUMEN
Background. Opioids contribute to more than 60 000 deaths annually in North America. While the expansion of overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs has been recommended in response to the opioid crisis, their effectiveness remains unclear. Objectives. To conduct an umbrella review of systematic reviews to provide a broad-based conceptual scheme of the effect and feasibility of OEND and to identify areas for possible optimization. Search Methods. We conducted the umbrella review of systematic reviews by searching PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the reference lists of relevant articles. Briefly, an academic librarian used a 2-concept search, which included opioid subject headings and relevant keywords with a modified PubMed systematic review filter. Selection Criteria. Eligible systematic reviews described comprehensive search strategies and inclusion and exclusion criteria, evaluated the quality or risk of bias of included studies, were published in English or French, and reported data relevant to either the safety or effectiveness of OEND programs, or optimal strategies for the management of opioid overdose with naloxone in out-of-hospital settings. Data Collection and Analysis. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and the quality of included reviews was assessed in duplicate with AMSTAR-2, a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews. Review quality was rated critically low, low, moderate, or high based on 7 domains: protocol registration, literature search adequacy, exclusion criteria, risk of bias assessment, meta-analytical methods, result interpretation, and presence of publication bias. Summary tables were constructed, and confidence ratings were provided for each outcome by using a previously modified version of the Royal College of General Practitioners' clinical guidelines. Main Results. Six systematic reviews containing 87 unique studies were included. We found that OEND programs produce long-term knowledge improvement regarding opioid overdose, improve participants' attitudes toward naloxone, provide sufficient training for participants to safely and effectively manage overdoses, and effectively reduce opioid-related mortality. High-concentration intranasal naloxone (> 2 mg/mL) was as effective as intramuscular naloxone at the same dose, whereas lower-concentration intranasal naloxone was less effective. Evidence was limited for other naloxone formulations, as well as the need for hospital transport after overdose reversal. The preponderance of evidence pertained persons who use heroin. Author's Conclusions. Evidence suggests that OEND programs are effective for reducing opioid-related mortality; however, additional high-quality research is required to optimize program delivery. Public Health Implications. Community-based OEND programs should be implemented widely in high-risk populations.
RESUMEN
Aims: The accuracy of voice-assisted technologies, such as Amazon Alexa, to collect data in patients who are older or have heart failure (HF) is unknown. The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of increasing age and comorbid HF, when compared with younger participants and caregivers, and how these different subgroups classify their experience using a voice-assistant device, for screening purposes. Methods and results: Subgroup analysis (HF vs. caregivers and younger vs. older participants) of the VOICE-COVID-II trial, a randomized controlled study where participants were assigned with subsequent crossover to receive a SARS-CoV2 screening questionnaire by Amazon Alexa or a healthcare personnel. Overall concordance between the two methods was compared using unweighted kappa scores and percentage of agreement. From the 52 participants included, the median age was 51 (34-65) years and 21 (40%) were HF patients. The HF subgroup showed a significantly lower percentage of agreement compared with caregivers (95% vs. 99%, P = 0.03), and both the HF and older subgroups tended to have lower unweighted kappa scores than their counterparts. In a post-screening survey, both the HF and older subgroups were less acquainted and found the voice-assistant device more difficult to use compared with caregivers and younger individuals. Conclusion: This subgroup analysis highlights important differences in the performance of a voice-assistant-based technology in an older and comorbid HF population. Younger individuals and caregivers, serving as facilitators, have the potential to bridge the gap and enhance the integration of these technologies into clinical practice. Study Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04508972.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effects of canagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes with and without prevalent cardiovascular disease (secondary and primary prevention). METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a pooled participant-level analysis of the CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) Program and CREDENCE (Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes With Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation) trial. The CANVAS Program included participants with type 2 diabetes at elevated cardiovascular risk, whereas the CREDENCE trial included participants with type 2 diabetes and albuminuric chronic kidney disease. Hazard ratios (HRs) with interaction terms were obtained from Cox regression models to estimate relative risk reduction with canagliflozin versus placebo across the primary and secondary prevention groups. We analyzed 5616 (38.9%) and 8804 (61.1%) individuals in the primary and secondary prevention subgroups, respectively. Primary versus secondary prevention participants were on average younger (62.2 versus 63.8 years of age) and more often women (42% versus 31%). Canagliflozin reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.76-0.94]) consistently across primary and secondary prevention subgroups (Pinteraction=0.86). Similarly, no treatment effect heterogeneity was observed with canagliflozin for hospitalization for heart failure, cardiovascular death, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality (all Pinteraction>0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Canagliflozin reduced cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity for the treatment effect across the primary and secondary prevention subgroups in the CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial. Although studies on the optimal implementation of canagliflozin within these populations are warranted, these results reinforce canagliflozin's role in cardiorenal prevention and treatment in individuals with type 2 diabetes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01032629, NCT01989754, NCT02065791.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2 , Humanos , Femenino , Canagliflozina/uso terapéutico , Canagliflozina/farmacología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Riñón , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/prevención & control , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the health care system, limiting health care resources such as the availability of health care professionals, patient monitoring, contact tracing, and continuous surveillance. As a result of this significant burden, digital tools have become an important asset in increasing the efficiency of patient care delivery. Digital tools can help support health care institutions by tracking transmission of the virus, aiding in the screening process, and providing telemedicine support. However, digital health tools face challenges associated with barriers to accessibility, efficiency, and privacy-related ethical issues. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the study design of an open-label, noninterventional, crossover, randomized controlled trial aimed at assessing whether interactive voice response systems can screen for SARS-CoV-2 in patients as accurately as standard screening done by people. The study aims to assess the concordance and interrater reliability of symptom screening done by Amazon Alexa compared to manual screening done by research coordinators. The perceived level of comfort of patients when interacting with voice response systems and their personal experience will also be evaluated. METHODS: A total of 52 patients visiting the heart failure clinic at the Royal Victoria Hospital of the McGill University Health Center, in Montreal, Quebec, will be recruited. Patients will be randomly assigned to first be screened for symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 either digitally, by Amazon Alexa, or manually, by the research coordinator. Participants will subsequently be crossed over and screened either digitally or manually. The clinical setup includes an Amazon Echo Show, a tablet, and an uninterrupted power supply mounted on a mobile cart. The primary end point will be the interrater reliability on the accuracy of randomized screening data performed by Amazon Alexa versus research coordinators. The secondary end point will be the perceived level of comfort and app engagement of patients as assessed using 5-point Likert scales and binary mode responses. RESULTS: Data collection started in May 2021 and is expected to be completed in fall 2022. Data analysis is expected to be completed in early 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The use of voice-based assistants could improve the provision of health services and reduce the burden on health care personnel. Demonstrating a high interrater reliability between Amazon Alexa and health care coordinators may serve future digital tools to streamline the screening and delivery of care in the context of other conditions and clinical settings. The COVID-19 pandemic occurs during the first digital era using digital tools such as Amazon Alexa for disease screening, and it represents an opportunity to implement such technology in health care institutions in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04508972; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04508972. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41209.
RESUMEN
The acceptability of artificially intelligent interactive voice response (AI-IVR) systems in cardiovascular research settings is unclear. As a result, we evaluated peoples' attitudes regarding the Amazon Echo Show 8 device when used for electronic data capture in cardiovascular clinics. Participants were recruited following the Voice-Based Screening for SARS-CoV-2 Exposure in Cardiovascular clinics study. Overall, 215 people enrolled and underwent screening (mean age 46.1; 55% females) in the VOICE-COVID study and 58 people consented to participate in a post-screening survey. Following thematic analysis, four key themes affecting AI-IVR acceptability were identified. These were difficulties with communication (44.8%), limitations with available interaction modalities (41.4%), barriers with the development of therapeutic relationships (25.9%), and concerns with universality and accessibility (8.6%). While there are potential concerns with the use of AI-IVR technologies, these systems appeared to be well accepted in cardiovascular clinics. Increased development of these technologies could significantly improve healthcare access and efficiency.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2 , ActitudRESUMEN
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/41209.].
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: COMMANDER-HF was a randomised trial comparing rivaroxaban 2.5 mg two times a day to placebo, in addition to antiplatelet therapy, in patients hospitalised for worsening heart failure with coronary artery disease and sinus rhythm. Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of cardiovascular events and therefore have more to gain. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this post-hoc analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with (n=2052) and without diabetes (n=2970). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) or ischaemic stroke. HRs and 95% CIs with interaction analyses were used to describe event-rates and treatment effects. Patients with diabetes had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities (eg, hypertension, obesity) and increased incidence of cardiovascular events. Adjusted HRs for events in people with versus without diabetes were 1.34 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.50) for the primary outcome, 1.21 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.75) for stroke, 1.51 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.99) for MI, 1.17 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.31) for heart failure hospitalisation and 1.06 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.01) for major bleeding. Rivaroxaban had no significant effect on event-rates in patients with and without diabetes (all interaction p values >0.05). Low-dose rivaroxaban was associated with an overall reduction in ischaemic stroke (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95), with no apparent subgroup interaction according to diabetes status (p-int=0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In COMMANDER-HF a diagnosis of diabetes conferred higher rates of cardiovascular events that, with exception of ischaemic stroke, was not substantially reduced by rivaroxaban. Rivaroxaban was associated with reduced risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with and without diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01877915; Post-results.
Asunto(s)
Isquemia Encefálica , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico , Infarto del Miocardio , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Rivaroxabán/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/epidemiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Accidente Cerebrovascular/complicaciones , Isquemia Encefálica/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Cohortes , Inhibidores del Factor Xa , Infarto del Miocardio/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamiento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/inducido químicamente , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/complicacionesRESUMEN
Background: Mobile health (mHealth) interventions are increasingly being used for cardiovascular research and physical activity promotion. Objectives: As a result, the authors aimed to evaluate which features facilitate and impede routine engagement with mobile fitness applications. Methods: We distributed a pan-Canadian online questionnaire via the behavioral research platform Prolific.co to evaluate what features are associated with the use and routine engagement (ie, daily or weekly use) of mHealth fitness applications and attitudes about data sharing. Binary logistic regression was used to quantify the association between these endpoints and exploratory factors such as the perceived utility of various mHealth application features. Results: The survey received 694 responses. Most people were women (62%), the median age was 28 years (range: 18-78 years), and most people reported current use of an mHealth fitness application (48%). The perceived importance of personal health (OR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.34-4.50) was the factor most associated with the current use of an mHealth fitness application. The feature most associated with routine engagement was the ability to track progress toward a goal (OR: 5.10; 95% CI: 2.73-9.61) while the most significant barrier was the absence of goal customization features (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.25-0.81). The acceptance of sharing health data for research was high (56%), and privacy concerns did not significantly affect routine engagement (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.40-1.77). Results were consistent across race and gender. Conclusions: mHealth interventions have the potential to be scaled across populations. Optimizing applications to improve self-monitoring and personalization could increase routine engagement and, thus, user retention and intervention effectiveness.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests diabetes mellitus is an independent risk factor for adverse cardiovascular events in patients with heart failure. As a result, we sought to compare mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with and without diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Veteran Affairs Hospitals' databases were queried to identify all veterans diagnosed with HFrEF from 2007 to 2015. From the overall sample of 165,159 veterans, 41,120 patients with diabetes were matched by their propensity scores (without replacement) 1:1 to non-diabetic patients. To estimate the association between diabetes (Type 1 and 2) and overall mortality of HFrEF patients, a Cox proportional hazard model was used on the matched sample and controlled for patient characteristics for a mean follow up of 3.6 years (standard deviation ±2.3). RESULTS: In a matched sample of 41,120 veterans with HFrEF with and without diabetes, those with diabetes and HFrEF were more often on guideline-directed medical therapy than those without diabetes. In the matched cohort, the mortality risk for patients with concurrent HFrEF and diabetes was 17.7% at 1 year and 74.3% at 5 years, whereas the mortality risk for those without diabetes was 15.3% at 1 year and 69.2% at 5 years. After controlling for patient characteristics such as age, sex, body mass index, heart rate, medical therapies, comorbidities, medications, low-density lipoproteins, high-density lipoproteins, we found that patients with diabetes compared to those without had a significantly increased risk of mortality (HR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.77-1.92, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic HFrEF patients have a higher risk of mortality than non-diabetic HFrEF patients despite controlling for medical therapies and comorbidities.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Veteranos , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Humanos , Pronóstico , Factores de Riesgo , Volumen SistólicoRESUMEN
Background Clinical prediction models have been developed for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes. However, a systematic evaluation of these models' performance, applicability, and clinical impact is absent. Methods and Results We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Tufts' clinical prediction registry through February 2021. Studies needed to report the development, validation, clinical impact, or update of a prediction model for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes with measures of model performance and sufficient information for clinical use. Model assessment was done with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and meta-analyses of model discrimination were performed. We included 15 model development and 3 external validation studies with data from 999 167 people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 15 models, 6 had undergone external validation and only 1 had low concern for risk of bias and applicability (Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes). Seven models were presented in a clinically useful manner (eg, risk score, online calculator) and 2 models were classified as the most suitable for clinical use based on study design, external validity, and point-of-care usability. These were Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes (meta-analyzed c-statistic, 0.76) and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (meta-analyzed c-statistic, 0.78), which was the simplest model with only 5 variables. No studies reported clinical impact. Conclusions Most prediction models for hospitalization for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes have potential concerns with risk of bias or applicability, and uncertain external validity and clinical impact. Future research is needed to address these knowledge gaps.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Hospitalización , Humanos , Modelos Estadísticos , PronósticoRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Literature suggests that cannabis legalization may increase fatal motor vehicle collisions. However, evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to prevent drugged driving is limited. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, SafetyLit, Criminal Justice Database, Transport Research International Documentation, bibliographies, and relevant gray literature were searched systematically through May 2020. Randomized and nonrandomized studies of preventive interventions measuring drugged driving outcomes were included. Evidence certainty was judged per Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines to designate quality ratings from very low to high. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The search identified 11 RCTs and 17 nonrandomized studies conducted predominantly among youth (aged 15-25 years; n=33,711 of 37,117 active research participants). In the public, cannabis packaging with health warnings increases the knowledge about drugged driving effects (high certainty); roadside drug testing can reduce drugged driving among cannabis users (moderate certainty); media campaigns may increase deterrent attitudes and knowledge (low certainty); and state sanctions, including traffic offense criminalization, license withdrawal, and per se drugged driving laws, may have little or no effect on drug-related fatalities or injuries (very low-low certainty). For youth or previous offenders, motivational interviewing can prevent drugged driving and driver education programs can increase knowledge (moderate certainty), whereas drug abuse prevention, substance abuse treatment, and driver rehabilitation may prevent drugged driving (very low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is evidence to support the interventions that may improve drugged driving knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. However, the impact of such interventions on measures of drugged driving-related morbidity and mortality is uncertain. Further research is urgently required to address these gaps in knowledge.
Asunto(s)
Conducción de Automóvil , Cannabis , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Accidentes de Tránsito/prevención & control , Adolescente , Humanos , Concesión de LicenciasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Actigraphy-based measurements of physiologic parameters may enable design of patient-centric heart failure (HF) clinical trials. Recently, the Heart Failure Collaboratory focused on recommendations for meaningful change and use of actigraphy as an end point in HF clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have quantified the impact of HF interventions using actigraphy. METHODS: Using a scoping review strategy, we evaluated the use of actigraphy in HF RCTs. Studies were identified through electronic searches of Embase, OVID Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane Review. Data on trial characteristics and results were collected. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs with a total of 1,455 participants. The risk of bias across the included trials was high overall. All trials had the primary outcomes reflecting measures of either physical activity (n = 8), sleep (n = 2), or both (n = 1). Five trials evaluated response to pharmacologic therapies compared with placebo, 3 evaluated physical activity interventions, 2 evaluated group or cognitive therapy, and 1 evaluated sleep-ventilation strategy. Sample sizes ranged from 30 to 619 participants. There was significant heterogeneity relating to device type, body placement site, and handling of missing actigraphy data. Duration of monitoring ranged from 48 hours to 12 weeks. None of the studies evaluating pharmacologic therapies (n = 5) demonstrated a significant improvement of actigraphy-based primary end point measurements. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in the use, methodology, and results of actigraphy-based HF RCTs. Our results highlight the need to develop, standardize, and validate actigraphy-specific outcomes for use in HF clinical trials.