Cost and clinical impact of a nonmedical DPP-4 inhibitor switch in patients with diabetes

BACKGROUND: Nonmedical formulary switches (NMFS) routinely occur in managed health care plans and involve changing preferred medications for reasons outside of clinical considerations. The cost implications of NMFS are infrequently published and the clinical outcomes rarely assessed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world clinical and cost implications of an NMFS involving sitagliptin and linagliptin. METHODS: An NMFS was made to the Geisinger Health Plan (GHP) commercial, health care reform, and Medicaid formularies on February 1, 2018, involving a change in preferred medication from sitagliptin to linagliptin. Claims data from GHP and clinical information from electronic health records of the Geisinger Health System were used to evaluate the cost and clinical impact of this change. Patients aged 18 years or older who were continuously enrolled in a GHP commercial, health care reform, or Medicaid plan throughout the entire study period and had at least 1 fill for sitagliptin during the preswitch phase were included in the study. We investigated the differences in various clinical and economic outcomes from pre- to postswitch among those who switched and remained adherent to the new preferred therapy throughout the 12-month postperiod ("linagliptin switch" group) and patients who did not ("other switch" group). Clinical outcomes included all-cause hospitalization, diabetes-related hospitalization, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), while economic measures included changes in per member per month (PMPM) spending. The negative binomial regression model was used to estimate utilization counts. A generalized linear model with a log link and gamma distribution was used to analyze cost data. RESULTS: 1,203 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 501 (41.6%) individuals switched to and remained at least 80% adherent to linagliptin in the postperiod, while 702 (58.4%) did not. No difference between groups was found when comparing the pre- to postswitch change in all-cause hospitalization (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.46, 95% CI = 0.66-3.23, P = 0.3436) or diabetes-related hospitalization (IRR = 1.39, 95% CI = 0.62-3.10, P = 0.4203). Additionally, no difference was found between groups regarding the change in HbA1c 12-month postswitch compared with baseline (difference between groups = -0.10%, 95% CI = -0.39%-0.19%, P = 0.4962). Total PMPM spending was 43% higher in the other switch group compared with the linagliptin switch group (IRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.25-1.63, P < 0.0001). This trend was driven by 92% higher medical PMPM spending in the other switch group compared with the linagliptin switch group (IRR = 1.92, 95% CI = 1.58-2.33, P < 0.0001) but was offset by 12% lower pharmacy PMPM spending in the other switch group (IRR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.82-0.95, P = 0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: An NMFS from sitagliptin to linagliptin resulted in overall health plan savings with no significant changes in health outcomes. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was provided by Geisinger Health System, which had no role in the study outside of a final review of the submitted manuscript. Johns and Gionfriddo are Geisinger employees. The authors report no financial conflicts of interest.

Interventions supporting cost conversations between patients and clinicians: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Discussing cost during medical encounters may decrease the financial impact of medical care on patients and align their treatment plans with their financial capacities. We aimed to examine which interventions exist and quantify their effectiveness to support cost conversations.

METHODS

Several databases were queried (Embase; Ovid MEDLINE(R); Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily; the Cochrane databases; and Scopus) from their inception until January 31, 2020 using terms such as "clinician*", "patient*", "cost*", and "conversation*". Eligibility assessment, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently and in duplicate. We extracted study setting, design, intervention characteristics and outcomes related to patients, clinicians and quality metrics.

RESULTS

We identified four studies (1327 patients) meeting our inclusion criteria. All studies were non-randomised and conducted in the United States. Three were performed in a primary care setting and the fourth in an oncology. Two studies used decision aids that included cost information; one used a training session for health care staff about cost conversations, and the other directly delivered information regarding cost conversations to patients. All interventions increased cost-conversation frequency. There was no effect on out-of-pocket costs, satisfaction, medication adherence or understanding of costs of care.

CONCLUSION

The body of evidence is small and comprised of studies at high risk of bias. However, an increase in the frequency of cost conversations is consistent. Studies with higher quality are needed to ascertain the effects of these interventions on the acceptability, frequency and quality of cost conversations.

Implementation strategies to improve statin utilization in individuals with hypercholesterolemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous implementation strategies to improve utilization of statins in patients with hypercholesterolemia have been utilized, with varying degrees of success. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the state of evidence of implementation strategies on the uptake of statins.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This systematic review identified and categorized implementation strategies, according to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation, used in studies to improve statin use. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception to October 2018. All included studies were reported in English and had at least one strategy to promote statin uptake that could be categorized using the ERIC compilation. Data extraction was completed independently, in duplicate, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. We extracted LDL-C (concentration and target achievement), statin prescribing, and statin adherence (percentage and target achievement). A total of 258 strategies were used across 86 trials. The median number of strategies used was 3 (SD 2.2, range 1-13). Implementation strategy descriptions often did not include key defining characteristics: temporality was reported in 59%, dose in 52%, affected outcome in 9%, and justification in 6%. Thirty-one trials reported at least 1 of the 3 outcomes of interest: significantly reduced LDL-C (standardized mean difference [SMD] - 0.17, 95% CI - 0.27 to - 0.07, p = 0.0006; odds ratio [OR] 1.33, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58, p = 0.0008), increased rates of statin prescribing (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.60 to 3.06, p < 0.0001), and improved statin adherence (SMD 0.13, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.19; p = 0.0002; OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.63, p = 0.023). The number of implementation strategies used per study positively influenced the efficacy outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although studies demonstrated improved statin prescribing, statin adherence, and reduced LDL-C, no single strategy or group of strategies consistently improved outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018114952 .

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.

A mixed methods evaluation of the implementation of pharmacy services within a team-based at-home care program

BACKGROUND

Sub-optimal medication use results in significant avoidable morbidity, mortality, and costs. Programs, such as comprehensive medication management (CMM), can help to optimize medication use, improve outcomes, and reduce costs. However, implementing programs like CMM can be challenging and differences in how CMM has been implemented may be responsible for observed heterogeneity in the outcomes associated with CMM.

OBJECTIVE(S)

Describe the implementation strategies utilized in implementing CMM telephonically within a team-based at-home care program and evaluate the implementation process.

METHODS

The implementation of CMM was facilitated using various implementation strategies including: develop educational material and conduct training, change record system, audit and feedback, learning collaborative, quality monitoring, readiness assessment, and implementation team formation. The impact of these strategies as well as pharmacist and team member perspectives on the implementation of CMM were examined using mixed methods and guided by Proctor's conceptual model for implementation.

RESULTS

The pharmacists felt that most of the implementation strategies used to facilitate consistent delivery of CMM were useful, but were unable to successfully implement all of them. Despite this, significant increases in fidelity to steps of the patient care process was achieved. The pharmacists felt that CMM was acceptable, appropriate for patient population, and feasible, but barriers (e.g., the telephonic and remote nature of the practice, the evolving nature of the program, and the difficulty in coordinating care between the patients primary care team and the care team affiliated with the program) affected the feasibility and organizational fit of CMM within this team-based, at-home care program. General pharmacy services, however, were seen as acceptable, appropriate, and feasible.

CONCLUSION

Deliberately designing and utilizing a variety of implementation strategies can facilitate the implementation of CMM and significantly increase fidelity to the patient care process. To improve feasibility and organizational fit of CMM, additional barriers and challenges need to be addressed.

The trade-off dilemma in pharmacotherapy of COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and implications

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected millions of people worldwide and has contributed to over 650,000 deaths. This review synthesizes the literature on COVID-19 pharmacotherapy to inform practice and policymaking.

AREAS COVERED

The authors systematically review the published literature on COVID-19 therapeutics, grouping candidate treatments into repurposed, adjunct, and experimental agents. They conducted meta-analysis where appropriate and provide recommendations based on compilation from real-time/interim therapeutic guidelines. They then advise on how to navigate and advance the evidence in the current context of uncertainty and urgency and provide expert opinion on suggested framework.

EXPERT OPINION

Current evidence does not support a clear role for pharmacotherapy in COVID-19. While promising signals have been found through limited number of RCTs, these must be interpreted with caution. Without proper protection from bias and confounding we risk exposing patients to treatments where the potential for benefit is at best unclear, yet the potential for harm from adverse effects is high leading to a trade-off dilemma in decision making. Advancing the evidence requires a coordinated effort to design and conduct robust trials and to systematically synthesize and critically evaluate findings. Therapies should be reserved for use in clinical trials, emergency or compassionate access until we gain more confidence in the balance of benefit and harm.

A deeper analysis in thyroid research: A meta-epidemiological study of the American Thyroid Association clinical guidelines

Background

The American Thyroid Association (ATA) uses the GRADE or the American College of Physicians (ACP) system to develop recommendations. Recommendations based on low-quality evidence should spur for the conduction of clinical studies, if feasible. The extent to which recommendations by the ATA based on low-quality of evidence are being actively researched remains unknown.

Methods

Clinical guidelines produced by the ATA using the GRADE or the ACP system to classify evidence were deemed eligible. Reviewers, in duplicate and independently, extracted therapeutic recommendations based on low-quality evidence, whereas recommendations with higher quality of evidence, aimed at diagnosis, or best practice statements were excluded. Eligible recommendations based on low-quality evidence were deconstructed to their components using the PICO format. We then searched on clinicaltrials.gov to identify ongoing research. Trials were deemed eligible if they addressed the PICO question with at least one of the intended outcomes.

Results

A total of 543 recommendations were retrieved, of which 305 (56%) were based on low-quality of evidence and only 90 were deemed eligible. Of these, we found that 33 (37%) recommendations were actively being researched in 53 clinical trials. Most of the trials were randomized and funded by non-profit organizations. Many clinical trials studied thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer (26/53; 49%), whereas few studied were aimed at anaplastic thyroid cancer (2/53; 4%).

Conclusion

One out of three of gaps in evidence, identified as low quality during the development of ATA guidelines, are currently actively researched. This finding calls for the need to develop a better research infrastructure and funding to support thyroid research.

Medications requiring prior authorization across health insurance plans

Objective

To determine the amount of variation in numbers and types of medications requiring prior authorization (PA) by insurance plan and type.

Methods

Most health insurance companies require PA for medications to ensure safe and effective use and contain costs. We generated 4 lists of medications that required PA during 2017 for commercial, marketplace, Medicaid, and Medicare plans. We aggregated medications according to the generic medication name equivalent using codes and medication names. We compared these medications to assess how many of the medications required PA by 1, 2, 3, or all 4 of the insurance plans. We counted all prescription orders written for a patient age 18 years or older with health plan insurance during 2017 for any of the medications that appeared on the health plan’s PA lists by querying the electronic health record.

Results

PA was required for 600 unique medications in 2017 across the 4 plans. Of 691,457 prescription orders written for 114,159 members, 31,631 (5%) were written for 1 of the 600 medications that required PA by at least 1 insurance plan. There were 12,540 medication orders (written for 6,642 members) that potentially required PA. The marketplace plan required PA for the greatest number of medications (440), followed by the Medicare (272), commercial (271), and Medicaid (72) plans. The most commonly prescribed classes of medications for which PA was required by at least 1 plan were antihyperlipidemics (22% of orders potentially requiring PA), narcotic analgesics (13%), hypnotics (12%), antidiabetic medications (9%), and antidepressants (9%). For only 25% of medications (151 of 600) was PA required by at least 3 plans, and for only 5% (32 of 600) was PA required by all 4 insurance types.

Conclusion

Medications requiring PA can differ within a single health insurance company, but this variation may be unavoidable due to external factors.

Understanding the medication prior-authorization process: A case study of patients and clinical staff from a large rural integrated health delivery system

PURPOSE

The barriers and solutions to the current prior-authorization (PA) process at an integrated health system were evaluated.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with patients at an integrated health system who also had insurance from an affiliated health plan and at least 1 denial for a medication in the past year. Semistructured interviews were conducted with medical staff (physicians, office staff, and PA experts). Both focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Inductive analysis was used to code transcripts and develop themes.

RESULTS

Three focus groups were conducted with 13 patients, and 9 medical staff (3 staff physicians, 2 office staff, and 4 PA staff) who have interactions with the PA process interviewed. Several themes were identified including the complexity of the PA process, consequences experienced, and ineffective communication between key stakeholders. A cross-cutting theme was that stakeholders expressed feelings of frustration, anxiety, and anger throughout the PA process. All stakeholders offered insights on how the process could be improved to better facilitate their preferences, such as access to the list of medications that require PA and the need for a patient advocate.

CONCLUSION

Results of this study revealed that the PA process was frustrating, upsetting, and infuriating to patients and medical staff involved in the process. Three main themes identified included the complexity of the PA process, consequences experienced from the PA process, and ineffective communication between stakeholders.

Multimodal Postoperative Pain Control Is Effective and Reduces Opioid Use After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

Opioids have been the mainstay for postoperative pain relief for many decades. Recently, opioid-related adverse events and death have been linked to postoperative dependency. Multimodal approaches to postoperative pain control may be part of the solution to this health care crisis. The safety and effectiveness of multimodal pain control regimens after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) has not been well studied. The primary aim of our study was to determine if an evidence-based, multimodal pain regimen during hospitalization could decrease the total oral morphine equivalent (TME) use after LRYGB.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing outcomes prior to the implementation of a multimodal pain protocol (December 2010-December 2012) to those after implementation (April 2013-July 2015). The protocol utilized oral celecoxib and scheduled oral acetaminophen for pain control, with opioids used only as needed for breakthrough pain. Data was extracted from an electronic medical record and an institutionally maintained database of all patients undergoing bariatric surgery at a single center.

RESULTS

Compared to controls, the multimodal pain regimen significantly reduced TME used and maximum pain scores with no change in mean pain scores. Multimodal pain protocol patients had a shorter length of stay with no increase in bleeding complications or marginal ulcer rates.

CONCLUSIONS

An opioid-sparing multimodal pain regimen adequately controls pain while reducing TME use. The regimen appears to be safe and was associated with a reduced length of stay in patients undergoing LRYGB.

Prediction of individual outcomes for asthma sufferers

We consider the problem of individual-specific medication level recommendation (initiation, removal, increase, or decrease) for asthma sufferers. Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in both adults and children, affecting 8% of the US population and costing $37-63 billion/year in the United States of America. Asthma is a complex disease, whose symptoms may wax and wane, making it difficult for clinicians to predict outcomes and prognosis. Improved ability to predict prognosis can inform decision making and may promote conversations between clinician and provider around optimizing medication therapy. Data from the US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) years 2000-2010 were used to fit a longitudinal model for a multivariate response of adverse events (Emergency Department or in-patient visits, excessive rescue inhaler use, and oral steroid use). To reduce bias in the estimation of medication effects, medication level was treated as a latent process which was restricted to be consistent with prescription refill data. This approach is demonstrated to be effective in the MEPS cohort via predictions on a validation hold out set and a synthetic data simulation study. This framework can be easily generalized to medication decisions for other conditions as well.

Preferences and attitudes of young Chinese clinicians about using a shared decision making tools for communicating cardiovascular risk

OBJECTIVE

This study assesses the attitudes and preferences of Chinese clinicians toward their involvement in shared decision making (SDM).

METHODS

From May 2014 to May 2015, 200 Chinese clinicians from two hospitals were enrolled to complete a survey on their attitude towards SDM. We conducted the survey via face-to-face interviews before and after an educational intervention on SDM among young Chinese clinicians. The clinicians were asked to give the extent of agreement to SDM. They also gave the extent of difficulty in using decision aids (DAs) during the SDM process. The variation in the range of responses to each question before and after the SDM intervention was recorded. The frequency of changed responses was analyzed by using JMP 6.0 software. Data were statistically analyzed using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests, as appropriate to the data type. Multiple logistic regressions were used to test for those factors significantly and independently associated with preference for an approach for each scenario.

RESULTS

Of the 200 young Chinese clinicians sampled, 59.0% indicated a preference for SDM and a desire to participate in SDM before receiving education or seeing the DA, and this number increased to 69.0% after seeing the DA with the sample video of the SDM process on Statin Choice. However, 28.5% of the respondents still reported that, in their current practice, they make clinical decisions on behalf of their patients. The clinicians who denied a desire to use the DA stated that the main barriers to implement SDM or DA use in China are lack of time and knowledge of SDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Most young Chinese clinicians want to participate in SDM. However, they state the main barriers to perform SDM are lack of experience and time. The educational intervention about SDM that exposes clinicians to DAs was found to increase their receptivity.

Medication therapy disease management: Geisinger's approach to population health management

PURPOSE

Pharmacists' involvement in a population health initiative focused on chronic disease management is described.

SUMMARY

Geisinger Health System has cultivated a culture of innovation in population health management, as highlighted by its ambulatory care pharmacy program, the Medication Therapy Disease Management (MTDM) program. Initiated in 1996, the MTDM program leverages pharmacists' pharmacotherapy expertise to optimize care and improve outcomes. MTDM program pharmacists are trained and credentialed to manage over 16 conditions, including atrial fibrillation (AF) and multiple sclerosis (MS). Over a 15-year period, Geisinger Health Plan (GHP)-insured patients with AF whose warfarin therapy was managed by the MTDM program had, on average, 18% fewer emergency department (ED) visits and 18% fewer hospitalizations per year than GHP enrollees with AF who did not receive MTDM services, with 23% lower annual total care costs. Over a 2-year period, GHP-insured patients with MS whose pharmacotherapy was managed by pharmacists averaged 28% fewer annual ED visits than non-pharmacist-managed patients; however, the mean annual total care cost was 21% higher among MTDM clinic patients.

CONCLUSION

The Geisinger MTDM program has evolved over 20 years from a single pharmacist-run anticoagulation clinic into a large program focused on managing the health of an ever-growing population. Initial challenges in integrating pharmacists into the Geisinger patient care framework as clinical experts were overcome by demonstrating the MTDM program's positive impact on patient outcomes.

Lipid-Lowering Agents in Older Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of lipid-lowering agents on patient-important outcomes in older individuals is unclear.

METHODS

We included randomized trials that enrolled individuals aged 65 years or older and that included at least 1 year of follow-up.Pairs of reviewers selected and appraised the trials.

RESULTS

We included 23 trials that enrolled 60,194 elderly patients. For primary prevention, statins reduced the risk of coronary artery disease [CAD; relative risk (RR): 0.79, 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.91] and myocardial infarction (MI; RR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.66) but not all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or stroke. These effects were imprecise in patients with diabetes, but there was no significant interaction between diabetes status and the intervention effect. For secondary prevention, statins reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.89), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.79), CAD (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.77), MI (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.79), and revascularization (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.77). Intensive (vs less-intensive) statin therapy reduced the risk of CAD and heart failure. Niacin did not reduce the risk of revascularization, and fibrates did not reduce the risk of stroke, cardiovascular mortality, or CAD.

CONCLUSION

High-certainty evidence supports statin use for secondary prevention in older individuals. Evidence for primary prevention is less certain. Data in older individuals with diabetes are limited; however, no empirical evidence has shown a significant difference based on diabetes status.

Women's Values and Preferences Regarding Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Several treatments are available to reduce the risk of fragility fractures associated with osteoporosis. The choice of treatment requires knowledge of patients' values and preferences. The aim of the present study was to summarize what is known about the values and preferences relevant to the management of osteoporosis in women.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases for studies reported in any language that had included women who had already started or were about to start any pharmacological therapy for osteoporosis. Pairs of reviewers independently selected the studies and extracted the data. The results were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

We included 26 studies reporting on 15,348 women (mean age, 66 years). The women considered the effectiveness and adverse events equally, followed by the convenience of taking the drug and its effect on daily routine (less frequent dosing was preferred, the oral route was preferred, and the injectable route was preferred over oral if given less frequently). The treatment cost and duration were less important factors for decision making. Fear of breast cancer and fear of resuming uterine bleeding were common reasons for not choosing estrogen therapy. Calcium and vitamin D were viewed as safe and natural. Across the studies, the preferences were not affected by age, previous drug exposure, or employment status.

CONCLUSIONS

Women starting osteoporosis medications value effectiveness and side effects equally and prefer medications given less frequently. Injectable drugs appear acceptable if given less frequently. More research on patient values and preferences is needed to guide decision making in osteoporosis.

Antihypertensive Agents in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

This systematic review summarizes the benefits of treating blood pressure (BP) in individuals 65 years and older.

METHODS

We included randomized trials that evaluated BP-lowering medications or BP targets in individuals 65 years and older. Trials were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers.

RESULTS

We included 19 trials (42,134 patients). In individuals 65 years or older, antihypertensive therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [relative risk: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81 to 0.94); high certainty evidence; mean follow-up 31 months], cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and chronic kidney disease. Individuals 75 years or older had a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and heart failure. Strict systolic BP targets (<120 mm Hg and <130 mm Hg) were associated with a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and heart failure, whereas more liberal systolic targets (<150 mm Hg and <160 mm Hg) were associated with lower risk of heart failure and stroke. Older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) had lower risk of chronic kidney disease without a significant reduction in other outcomes. However, there was no significant difference in estimates (i.e., interaction) between those with and without DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals aged 65 years and older or 75 years and older who receive antihypertensive therapy have statistically significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, and stroke. There was no statistically significant difference in estimates between those with and without DM.

Developing a Conversation Aid to Support Shared Decision Making: Reflections on Designing Anticoagulation Choice

Patient-centered care requires that treatments respond to the problematic situation of each patient in a manner that makes intellectual, emotional, and practical sense, an achievement that requires shared decision making (SDM). To implement SDM in practice, tools-sometimes called conversation aids or decision aids-are prepared by collating, curating, and presenting high-quality, comprehensive, and up-to-date evidence. Yet, the literature offers limited guidance for how to make evidence support SDM. Herein, we describe our approach and the challenges encountered during the development of Anticoagulation Choice, a conversation aid to help patients with atrial fibrillation and their clinicians jointly consider the risk of thromboembolic stroke and decide whether and how to respond to this risk with anticoagulation.

Humanistic communication in the evaluation of shared decision making: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent to which evaluations of shared decision making (SDM) assess the extent and quality of humanistic communication (i.e., respect, compassion, empathy).

METHODS

We systematically searched Web of Science and Scopus for prospective studies published between 2012 and February 2018 that evaluated SDM in actual clinical decisions using validated SDM measures. Two reviewers working independently and in duplicate extracted all statements from eligible studies and all items from SDM measurement instruments that referred to humanistic patient-clinician communication.

RESULTS

Of the 154 eligible studies, 14 (9%) included ≥1 statements regarding humanistic communication, either in framing the study (N = 2), measuring impact (e.g., empathy, respect, interpersonal skills; N = 9), as patients'/clinicians' accounts of SDM (N = 2), in interpreting study results (N = 3), and in discussing implications of study findings (N = 3). Of the 192 items within the 11 SDM measurement instruments deployed in the included studies, 7 (3.6%) items assessed humanistic communication.

CONCLUSION

Assessments of the quality of SDM focus narrowly on SDM technique and rarely assess humanistic aspects of patient-clinician communication.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Considering SDM as merely a technique may reduce SDM's patient-centeredness and undermine its' contribution to patient care.

Eliciting the Patient's Agenda- Secondary Analysis of Recorded Clinical Encounters

BACKGROUND

Eliciting patient concerns and listening carefully to them contributes to patient-centered care. Yet, clinicians often fail to elicit the patient's agenda and, when they do, they interrupt the patient's discourse.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe the extent to which patients' concerns are elicited across different clinical settings and how shared decision-making tools impact agenda elicitation.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

We performed a secondary analysis of a random sample of 112 clinical encounters recorded during trials testing the efficacy of shared decision-making tools.

MAIN MEASURES

Two reviewers, working independently, characterized the elicitation of the patient agenda and the time to interruption or to complete statement; we analyzed the distribution of agenda elicitation according to setting and use of shared decision-making tools.

KEY RESULTS

Clinicians elicited the patient's agenda in 40 of 112 (36%) encounters. Agendas were elicited more often in primary care (30/61 encounters, 49%) than in specialty care (10/51 encounters, 20%); p = .058. Shared decision-making tools did not affect the likelihood of eliciting the patient's agenda (34 vs. 37% in encounters with and without these tools; p = .09). In 27 of the 40 (67%) encounters in which clinicians elicited patient concerns, the clinician interrupted the patient after a median of 11 seconds (interquartile range 7-22; range 3 to 234 s). Uninterrupted patients took a median of 6 s (interquartile range 3-19; range 2 to 108 s) to state their concern.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians seldom elicit the patient's agenda; when they do, they interrupt patients sooner than previously reported. Physicians in specialty care elicited the patient's agenda less often compared to physicians in primary care. Failure to elicit the patient's agenda reduces the chance that clinicians will orient the priorities of a clinical encounter toward specific aspects that matter to each patient.

Impact of decision aids used during clinical encounters on clinician outcomes and consultation length: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clinicians' satisfaction with encounter decision aids is an important component in facilitating implementation of these tools. We aimed to determine the impact of decision aids supporting shared decision making (SDM) during the clinical encounter on clinician outcomes.

METHODS

We searched nine databases from inception to June 2017. Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of decision aids used during clinical encounters with an unaided control group were eligible for inclusion. Due to heterogeneity among included studies, we used a narrative evidence synthesis approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-five papers met inclusion criteria including 22 RCTs and 3 qualitative or mixed-methods studies nested in an RCT, together representing 23 unique trials. These trials evaluated healthcare decisions for cardiovascular prevention and treatment (n=8), treatment of diabetes mellitus (n=3), treatment of osteoporosis (n=2), treatment of depression (n=2), antibiotics to treat acute respiratory infections (n=3), cancer prevention and treatment (n=4) and prenatal diagnosis (n=1). Clinician outcomes were measured in only a minority of studies. Clinicians' satisfaction with decision making was assessed in only 8 (and only 2 of them showed statistically significantly greater satisfaction with the decision aid); only three trials asked if clinicians would recommend the decision aid to colleagues and only five asked if clinicians would use decision aids in the future. Outpatient consultations were not prolonged when a decision aid was used in 9 out of 13 trials. The overall strength of the evidence was low, with the major risk of bias related to lack of blinding of participants and/or outcome assessors.

CONCLUSION

Decision aids can improve clinicians' satisfaction with medical decision making and provide helpful information without affecting length of consultation time. Most SDM trials, however, omit outcomes related to clinicians' perspective on the decision making process or the likelihood of using a decision aid in the future.

Balancing feasibility and comprehensiveness: examining medications for reducing emergency hospital admissions

Emergency hospital admissions are common, with several interventions having been developed to reduce their rates. Bobrovitz et al. summarized the available body of evidence regarding pharmacologic therapies aimed at reducing emergency hospital admissions, and identified 28 medications for which high- or moderate-quality evidence supports their use, 11 of which were identified as being supported by current guideline recommendations. Additionally, the authors identified 28 medications supported by low- or very low-quality evidence, which can serve as targets for future research. The article by Bobrovitz et al. presents a good summary of the evidence, albeit with limitations in the search strategy that cannot guarantee the review as comprehensive. Despite this, the review has important implications for policymakers, guideline panels, researchers, clinicians, and funders since the identified medications can either be targets for quality improvement initiatives or for future research. Bobrovitz et al.'s review highlights the challenge that systematic reviewers face when balancing feasibility and comprehensiveness.Please see related article: https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-018-1104-9.

Comparison of audio vs. audio + video for the rating of shared decision making in oncology using the observer OPTION5 instrument: an exploratory analysis

BACKGROUND

How non-verbal data may influence observer-administered ratings of shared decision making is unknown. Our objective for this exploratory analysis was to determine the effect of mode of data collection (audio+video vs. audio only) on the scoring of the OPTION⁵ instrument, an observer rated measure of shared decision making.

METHODS

We analyzed recordings of 15 encounters between cancer patients and clinicians in which a clinical decision was made. Audio+video or audio only recordings of the encounters were randomly assigned to four trained raters, who reviewed them independently. We compared the adjusted mean scores of audio+video and audio only.

RESULTS

Forty-one unique decisions were identified within the 15 encounters. The mean OPTION⁵ score for audio+video was 17.5 (95% CI 13.5, 21.6) and for audio only was 21.8 (95% CI 17.2, 26.4) with a mean difference of 4.28 (95% CI = 0.36, 8.21; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

A rigorous and well established measure of shared decision making performs differently when the data source is audio only. Data source may influence rating of observer administered measures of shared decision making. This potential bias needs to be confirmed as video recording to examine communication behaviors becomes more common.

Developing Pharmacogenomic Reports: Insights from Patients and Clinicians

Increasingly, for a variety of indications, patients have their genomes sequenced and actionable results returned. A subset of returned results is pharmacogenomic (PGx) variants involved in the metabolism or action of medications. Although the impact of these variants on health is well-documented, little research exists on how to communicate these findings to patients and clinicians. We conducted semistructured interviews with end users to understand how best to communicate PGx results. Overall, patients and clinicians had similar opinions regarding report content, delivery, and application. Unique concerns specific to each stakeholder group were also expressed. Patients wanted an easy-to-understand individualized report that clinicians utilized to guide their care. Clinicians wanted reports that were easy-to-use, actionable, and integrated into their workflow. Implementation of these reports in a clinical setting will allow for broader user feedback and iterative improvement.

ProvenCare-Psoriasis: A disease management model to optimize care

There are a variety of evidence-based treatments available for psoriasis. The transition of this evidence into practice is challenging. In this article, we describe the design of our disease management approach for Psoriasis (ProvenCare®) and present preliminary evidence of the effect of its implementation. In designing our approach, we identified three barriers to optimal care: 1) lack of a standardized and discrete disease activity measure within the electronic health record, 2) lack of a system-wide, standardized approach to care, and 3) non-uniform financial access to appropriate non-pharmacologic treatments. We implemented several solutions, which collectively form our approach. We standardized the documentation of clinical data such as body surface area (BSA), created a disease management algorithm for psoriasis, and aligned incentives to facilitate the implementation of the algorithm. This approach provides more coordinated, cost effective care for psoriasis, while being acceptable to key stakeholders. Future work will examine the effect of the implementation of our approach on important clinical and patient outcomes.