Non-attendance at secondary prevention clinics: the effect on lipid management

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 .

Secondary prevention in coronary artery disease. Achieved goals and possibilities for improvements

AIM

To describe presence of risk indicators of recurrence 6 months after hospitalisation due to coronary artery disease at a university clinic.

METHODS

The presence of risk indicators, including tobacco use, lipid levels, blood pressure and glucometabolic status, including 24-hour blood pressure monitoring and an oral glucose-tolerance test, was analysed.

RESULTS

Of 1465 patients who were screened, 402 took part in the survey (50% previous myocardial infarction and 50% angina pectoris). Mean age was 64 years (range 40-85 years) and 23% were women. Present medications were: lipid lowering drugs (statins; 94%), beta-blockers (85%), aspirin or warfarin (100%) and ACE-inhibitors or angiotensin II blockers (66%). Values above target levels recommended in guidelines were: a) low density lipoprotein (LDL) in 40%; b) mean blood pressure (day or night) in 38% and c) smoking in 13%. Of all patients, 66% had at least one risk factor (LDL or blood pressure above target levels or current smoking). An abnormal glucose-tolerance test was found in 59% of patients without known diabetes. If no history of diabetes, 85% had either LDL or blood pressure above target levels, current smoking or an abnormal glucose-tolerance test. However, with treatment intensification to patients with elevated risk factors 56% reached target levels for blood pressure and 79% reached target levels for LDL.

CONCLUSION

Six months after hospitalisation due to coronary artery disease, despite the high use of medication aimed at prophylaxis against recurrence, the majority were either above target levels for LDL or blood pressure or continued to smoke.

Barriers to obtaining diagnostic testing for coronary artery disease among veterans

OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify factors associated with appointment nonattendance for diagnostic testing of coronary artery disease among veterans. For patients with possible heart disease, appointment nonattendance may seriously compromise short- and long-term outcomes. Understanding factors associated with nonattendance may help improve care while reducing inefficiency in service delivery.

METHODS

We surveyed patients who attended (n = 240) or did not attend (n = 139) a scheduled cardiac appointment at a midwestern Veterans Administration medical center. Multivariable regression models were used to assess factors associated with nonattendance.

RESULTS

Younger age, lower income, unemployment, and longer wait times for appointments were predictive of nonattendance. Nonattenders reported fewer cardiac symptoms and were more likely to attribute their symptoms to something other than heart disease. Nonattendance was also associated with a coping style characterized by avoidance of aversive information. Logistical issues, fear of diagnostic procedures, disbelief that one had heart disease, and medical mistrust were some of the reasons given for missed appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

Appointment nonattendance among veterans scheduled for cardiology evaluation was associated with several important cognitive factors. These factors should be considered when one is designing clinical systems to reduce patient nonattendance.

Urology out-patient non-attenders: are we wasting our time?

BACKGROUND

Out-patient non-attendance leads to inefficiency and patient morbidity.

AIMS AND METHODS

A phone survey of urology out-patient non-attenders over 1-month was performed to determine reasons for non-attendance, to identify patients who could be discharged, and the manner in which patients want reminders.

RESULTS

Seventy-six non-attenders were contacted. Fourteen were GP referred new patients. The reason for non-attendance (n = 10) was due to patient issues. Of the patients due for review (n = 62), it was a first non-attendance in 56. Only 41 (66%) claimed to have received notification or appointment cards. Eight patients said they were written to and 13 (21%) denied either receiving a written notification or an appointment card. Only eight patients rang to confirm/change their appointment. Ninety-nine percent said that they would like a further appointment by text message (34%), phone (37%), letter (36%) or email (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

We now hope to implement a number of methods to further reduce non-attendance rates based on the findings in this study.