Increasing risk-concordant cardiovascular care in diverse health systems: a mixed methods pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomized implementation trial of shared decision making (SDM4IP)

Statin intolerance management: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Statin intolerance is a key barrier to the effective prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Experts do not agree on what it is and how to respond to this problem clinically.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the range of expert recommendations about the care of patients with statin intolerance.

METHODS

Systematic review registered in PROSPERO that searched on April 1 2022 in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane, online textbooks, and specialty textbooks for expert reviews (e.g., review articles and book chapters), systematic reviews, or clinical practice guidelines published in the past 5 years without language restriction. Authors working in duplicate extracted definitions, management recommendations, and supportive evidence cited.

RESULTS

We identified 26 eligible articles, none of which described a systematic method to summarize the evidence or to develop and grade recommendations. Of these, 14 (54%) offered a definition of statin intolerance. A sequenced approach to management of statin intolerance was suggested in 24 (92%) articles describing 12 different approaches without supporting evidence of efficacy. Investigating for other causes was the most common first step. All authors suggested rechallenging after a washout period with either the same or other statin. Few considered nonlipid approaches to reducing ASCVD risk and none recommended involving patients in shared decision making.

CONCLUSION

We found substantial variability in the definition and management of statin intolerance among experts. Few focused on ASCVD risk reduction and none promoted the participation of patients in shared decision making about how to address the threat of ASCVD with or without statins.

Design and management considerations for control groups in hybrid effectiveness-implementation trials: Narrative review & case studies

Hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies allow researchers to combine study of a clinical intervention's effectiveness with study of its implementation with the aim of accelerating the translation of evidence into practice. However, there currently exists limited guidance on how to design and manage such hybrid studies. This is particularly true for studies that include a comparison/control arm that, by design, receives less implementation support than the intervention arm. Lack of such guidance can present a challenge for researchers both in setting up but also in effectively managing participating sites in such trials. This paper uses a narrative review of the literature (Phase 1 of the research) and comparative case study of three studies (Phase 2 of the research) to identify common themes related to study design and management. Based on these, we comment and reflect on: (1) the balance that needs to be struck between fidelity to the study design and tailoring to emerging requests from participating sites as part of the research process, and (2) the modifications to the implementation strategies being evaluated. Hybrid trial teams should carefully consider the impact of design selection, trial management decisions, and any modifications to implementation processes and/or support on the delivery of a controlled evaluation. The rationale for these choices should be systematically reported to fill the gap in the literature.

Translating guidelines into practice via implementation science: an update in lipidology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Guidelines provide recommendations for clinicians based on the best available evidence and informed by clinical expertise. These recommendations often fail to be utilized by clinicians hindering the translation of evidence into practice. The purpose of this review is to describe novel ways in which implementation science has been used to improve translation of guidelines into clinical practice in the field of lipidology.

RECENT FINDINGS

We searched PubMed for articles related to guideline implementation in lipidology published in 2021 and 2022. Identified articles were categorized into three domains: first, poor uptake of guideline recommendations in practice; second, implementation science as a solution to improve care; and third, examples of how implementation science can be incorporated into guidelines.

SUMMARY

The field of lipidology has identified that many guideline recommendations fail to be translated into practice and has started to utilize methods from implementation science to assess ways to shrink this gap. Future work should focus on deploying tools from implementation science to address current gaps in guideline development. Such as, developing a systematic approach to restructure guideline recommendations so they are implementable in practice and aid in clinicians' ability to easily translate them into practice.

The design and development of an encounter tool to support shared decision making about preventing cardiovascular events

Patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) tend to receive less intensive preventive care. Clinical practice guidelines recommend shared decision making (SDM) to improve the quality of primary CVD prevention. There are tools for use during the clinical encounter that promote SDM, but, to our knowledge, there are no SDM encounter tools that support conversations about available lifestyle and pharmacological options that can lead to preventive care that is congruent with patient goals and CVD risk. Using the best available evidence and human-centered design (iterative design in the context of ultimate use with users), our team developed a SDM encounter tool, CV Prevention Choice. Each subsequent version during the iterative development process was evaluated in terms of content, usefulness, and usability by testing it in real preventive encounters. The final version of the tool includes a calculator that estimates the patient's risk of a major atherosclerotic CVD event in the next 10 years. Lifestyle and medication options are presented, alongside their pros, cons, costs, and other burdens. The risk reduction achieved by the selected prevention program is then displayed to support collaborative deliberation and decision making. A U.S. multicenter trial is estimating the effectiveness of CV Prevention Choice in achieving risk-concordant CV prevention while identifying the best strategies for increasing the adoption of the SDM encounter tool and its routine use in practice.