Impact of a Rheumatology Clinic Protocol on Tobacco Cessation Quit Line Referrals

Cardiovascular disease risk assessment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A scoping review

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Identification of at-risk patients is paramount to initiate preventive care and tailor treatments accordingly. Despite international guidelines recommending all patients with RA undergo CVD risk assessment, rates remain suboptimal. The objectives of this review were to map the strategies used to conduct CVD risk assessments in patients with RA in routine care, determine who delivers CVD risk assessments, and identify what composite measures are used. The Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidelines were used. A literature search was conducted in electronic and grey literature databases, trial registries, medical clearing houses, and professional rheumatology organisations. Findings were synthesised narratively. A total of 12 studies were included. Strategies reported in this review used various system-based interventions to support delivery of CVD risk assessments in patients with RA, operationalised in different ways, adopting two approaches: (a) multidisciplinary collaboration, and (b) education. Various composite measures were cited in use, with and without adjustment for RA. Results from this review demonstrate that although several strategies to support CVD risk assessments in patients with RA are cited in the literature, there is limited evidence to suggest a standardised model has been applied to routine care. Furthermore, extensive evidence to map how health care professionals conduct CVD risk assessments in practice is lacking. Research needs to be undertaken to establish the extent to which healthcare professionals are CVD risk assessing their patients with RA in routine care. Key Points • A limited number of system-based interventions are in use to support the delivery of CVD risk assessments in patients with RA. • Multidisciplinary team collaboration, and education are used to operationalise interventions to support Health Care Professionals in conducting CVD risk assessments in practice. • The extent to which Health Care Professionals are CVD risk assessing their patients with RA needs to be established.

Implementing a Staff-Led Smoking Cessation Intervention in a Diverse Safety-Net Rheumatology Clinic: A Pre-Post Scalability Study in a Low-Resource Setting

OBJECTIVE

Quit Connect (QC), our specialty clinic smoking cessation intervention, supports clinic staff to check, advise, and connect willing patients to a state quit line or class. QC improved tobacco screening and quit line referrals 26-fold in a predominantly White academic health care system population. Implementing QC includes education, electronic health record (EHR) reminders, and periodic audit feedback. This study tested QC's feasibility and impact in a safety-net rheumatology clinic with a predominantly Black population.

METHODS

In this pre-post study, adult rheumatology visits were analyzed 12 months before through 18 months after QC intervention (November 2019 through November 2021, omitting COVID-19 peak April through November 2020). EHR data compared process and clinical outcomes, including offers, referrals to resources, completed referrals, and documented cessation. Clinic staff engaged in pre-post focus groups and questionnaires regarding intervention feasibility and acceptability. Cost-effectiveness was also assessed.

RESULTS

Visit-level patients who smoked were 89.8% Black and 69.5% women (n = 550). Before intervention, clinic staff rarely asked patients about readiness to cut back smoking (<10% assessment). After QC intervention, staff assessed quit readiness in 31.8% of visits with patients who smoked (vs 8.1% before); 58.9% of these patients endorsed readiness to cut back or quit. Of 102 accepting cessation services, 37% (n = 17) of those reached set a quit date. Staff found the intervention feasible and acceptable. Each quit attempt cost approximately $4 to $10.

CONCLUSION

In a safety-net rheumatology clinic with a predominantly Black population, QC improved tobacco screening, readiness-to-quit assessment, and referrals and was also feasible and cost-effective.

Multimorbidity in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Literature Review and Future Directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To offer a narrative review of literature and an update on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) multimorbidity research over the past five years as well as future directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with RA experience higher prevalence of multimorbidity (31-86% vs 18-71% in non-RA) and faster accumulation of comorbidities. Patients with multimorbidity have worse outcomes compared to non-RA multimorbid patients and RA without multimorbidity including mortality, cardiac events, and hospitalizations. Comorbid disease clusters often included: cardiopulmonary, cardiometabolic, and depression and pain-related conditions. High-frequency comorbidities included interstitial lung disease, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, and osteoporosis, thyroid disorders, hypertension, and cancer. Furthermore, patients with RA and multimorbidity are paradoxically at increased risk of high RA disease activity but experience a lower likelihood of biologic use and more biologic failures. RA patients experience higher prevalence of multimorbidity and worse outcomes versus non-RA and RA without multimorbidity. Findings call for further studies.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for Exercise, Rehabilitation, Diet, and Additional Integrative Interventions for Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop initial American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines on the use of exercise, rehabilitation, diet, and additional interventions in conjunction with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as part of an integrative management approach for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

An interprofessional guideline development group constructed clinically relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) questions. A literature review team then completed a systematic literature review and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate the certainty of evidence. An interprofessional Voting Panel (n = 20 participants) that included 3 individuals with RA achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

The Voting Panel achieved consensus on 28 recommendations for the use of integrative interventions in conjunction with DMARDs for the management of RA. Consistent engagement in exercise received a strong recommendation. Of 27 conditional recommendations, 4 pertained to exercise, 13 to rehabilitation, 3 to diet, and 7 to additional integrative interventions. These recommendations are specific to RA management, recognizing that other medical indications and general health benefits may exist for many of these interventions.

CONCLUSION

This guideline provides initial ACR recommendations on integrative interventions for the management of RA to accompany DMARD treatments. The broad range of interventions included in these recommendations illustrates the importance of an interprofessional, team-based approach to RA management. The conditional nature of most recommendations requires clinicians to engage persons with RA in shared decision-making when applying these recommendations.

A systematic review with meta-analysis of the effects of smoking cessation strategies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Smoking rates among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) exceed those in the general population. This study identified smoking cessation strategies used in patients with RA and synthesized data on their effects.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies that reported effects of interventions for smoking cessation in patients with RA. We searched 5 electronic databases until March 2022. Screening, quality appraisal, and data collection were done independently by 2 reviewers.

RESULTS

We included 18 studies reporting interventions for patients or providers: 14 evaluated strategies for patients (5 education on cardiovascular risk factors including smoking, 3 educational interventions on smoking cessation alone, 3 education with nicotine replacement and counseling, and 1 study each: education with nicotine replacement, counseling sessions alone, and a social marketing campaign). Smoking cessation rates ranged from 4% (95% CI: 2%-6%, 24 to 48 weeks) for cardiovascular risk education to 43% (95% CI: 21%-67%, 104 weeks) for counseling sessions alone. The pooled cessation rate for all interventions was 22% (95% CI: 8%-41%, 4 weeks to 104 weeks; 9 studies). Four interventions trained providers to ascertain smoking status and provide referrals for smoking cessation. The pooled rates of referrals to quit services increased from 5% in pre-implementation populations to 70% in post-implementation populations.

CONCLUSION

Studies varied in patient characteristics, the interventions used, and their implementation structure. Only 3 studies were controlled clinical trials. Additional controlled studies are needed to determine best practices for smoking cessation for patients with RA.

Interactive and Participatory Audit and Feedback (IPAF): theory-based development and multi-site implementation outcomes with specialty clinic staff

BACKGROUND

Theory-based implementation strategies, such as audit and feedback (A&F), can improve the adoption of evidence-based practices. However, few strategies have been developed and tested to meet the needs of specialty clinics. In particular, frontline staff can execute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction protocols, but A&F strategies to support them are not well examined. Our objective was to develop and evaluate a theory-based approach to A&F, Interactive and Participatory A&F (IPAF).

METHODS

We developed IPAF informed by two complementary theories, self-regulation theory (SRT) and self-determination theory (SDT). IPAF applies concepts from these theories to inform (1) what to address with staff to improve rates of best practices (SRT) and (2) how to interact with staff to improve behaviors aligned with best practices (SDT). We promoted IPAF fidelity by developing a semi-structured guide to facilitate staff discussion of target behaviors, perceived barriers, goals, and action plans. We evaluated IPAF in the context of eight quasi-experimental implementations in specialty clinics across two health systems. Following a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation design, we reported intervention outcomes for CVD risk reduction elsewhere. This paper reports implementation outcomes associated with IPAF, focusing on feasibility, appropriateness, acceptability, fidelity, and adoption. We evaluated implementation outcomes using mixed-methods data including electronic health record (EHR) data, team records, and staff questionnaire responses.

RESULTS

Eighteen staff participated in 99 monthly, individual, synchronous (face-to-face or phone) IPAF sessions during the first 6 months of implementation. Subsequently, we provided over 375 monthly feedback emails. Feasibility data revealed high staff attendance (90-93%) and engagement in IPAF sessions. Staff highly rated questionnaire items about IPAF acceptability. Team records and staff responses demonstrated fidelity of IPAF delivery and receipt. Adoption of target behaviors increased significantly (all P values < 0.05), and adoption or behaviors were maintained for over 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and evaluated a theory-based approach to A&F with frontline staff in specialty clinics to improve the implementation of evidence-based interventions. The findings support feasibility, appropriateness, acceptability, and fidelity of IPAF, and staff adoption and maintenance of target behaviors. By evaluating multi-site implementation outcomes, we extended prior research on clinic protocols and A&F beyond primary care settings and providers.