RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) often remains undiagnosed, and it independently raises the risk of ischemic stroke, which is largely reversible by oral anticoagulation. Although randomized trials using longer term screening approaches increase identification of AF, no studies have established that AF screening lowers stroke rates. OBJECTIVES: To address this knowledge gap, the GUARD-AF (Reducing Stroke by Screening for Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Individuals) trial screened participants in primary care practices using a 14-day continuous electrocardiographic monitor to determine whether screening for AF coupled with physician/patient decision-making to use oral anticoagulation reduces stroke and provides a net clinical benefit compared with usual care. METHODS: GUARD-AF was a prospective, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial designed to test whether screening for AF in people aged ≥70 years using a 14-day single-lead continuous electrocardiographic patch monitor could identify patients with undiagnosed AF and reduce stroke. Participants were randomized 1:1 to screening or usual care. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were hospitalization due to all-cause stroke and bleeding, respectively. Analyses used the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Enrollment began on December 17, 2019, and involved 149 primary care sites across the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic led to premature termination of enrollment, with 11,905 participants in the intention-to-treat population. Median follow-up was 15.3 months (Q1-Q3: 13.8-17.6 months). Median age was 75 years (Q1-Q3: 72-79 years), and 56.6% were female. The risk of stroke in the screening group was 0.7% vs 0.6% in the usual care group (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.69-1.75). The risk of bleeding was 1.0% in the screening group vs 1.1% in the usual care group (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.60-1.26). Diagnosis of AF was 5% in the screening group and 3.3% in the usual care group, and initiation of oral anticoagulation after randomization was 4.2% and 2.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, there was no evidence that screening for AF using a 14-day continuous electrocardiographic monitor in people ≥70 years of age seen in primary care practice reduces stroke hospitalizations. Event rates were low, however, and the trial did not enroll the planned sample size.(Reducing Stroke by Screening for Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Individuals [GUARD-AF]; NCT04126486).
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The "burden" of atrial fibrillation (AF) detected by screening likely influences stroke risk, but the distribution of burden is not well described. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to determine the frequency of AF and the distribution of AF burden found when screening individuals ≥70 years of age with a 14-day electrocardiograph monitor. METHODS: This is a cohort study of the screening arm of a randomized AF screening trial among those ≥70 years of age without a prior AF diagnosis (between 2019 and 2021). Screening was performed with a 14-day continuous electrocardiogram patch monitor. RESULTS: Analyzable patches were returned by 5,684 (95%) of screening arm participants; the median age was 75 years (Q1-Q3: 72-78 years), 57% were female, and the median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3 (Q1-Q3: 2-4). AF was detected in 252 participants (4.4%); 29 (0.5%) patients had continuous AF and 223 (3.9%) had paroxysmal AF. Among those with paroxysmal AF, the average indices of AF burden were of low magnitude with right-skewed distributions. The median percent time in AF was 0.46% (Q1-Q3: 0.02%-2.48%), or 75 (Q1-Q3: 3-454) minutes, and the median longest episode was 38 (Q1-Q3: 2-245) minutes. The upper quartile threshold of 2.48% time in AF corresponded to 7.6 hours. Age greater than 80 years was associated with screen-detected AF in our multivariable model (OR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.06-2.02). CONCLUSIONS: Most AF detected in these older patients was very low burden. However, one-quarter of those with AF had multiple hours of AF, raising concern about stroke risk. These findings have implications for targeting populations for AF screening trials and for responding to heart rhythm alerts from mobile devices (GUARD-AF [A Study to Determine if Identification of Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in People at least 70 Years of Age Reduces the Risk of Stroke]; NCT04126486).
RESUMO
Importance: Decisions about whether to stop colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests in older adults can be difficult and may benefit from shared decision-making (SDM). Objective: To evaluate the effect of physician training in SDM and electronic previsit reminders (intervention) vs reminders only (comparator) on receipt of the patient-preferred approach to CRC screening and on overall CRC screening rates of older adults at 12 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of the Promoting Informed Decisions About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Older Adults (PRIMED) cluster randomized clinical trial. In the PRIMED trial, primary care physicians (PCPs) from 36 primary care practices in Massachusetts and Maine were enrolled between May 1 and August 30, 2019, and were randomized to the intervention group or the comparator group. Patients aged 76 to 85 years who were overdue for CRC screening and did not have a prior diagnosis of CRC enrolled between October 21, 2019, and April 8, 2021. Data analysis was performed between May 24, 2022, and May 10, 2023. Interventions: Primary care physicians in the intervention group completed an SDM training course and received previsit reminders of patients eligible for CRC testing discussion, whereas PCPs in the comparator group received reminders only. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was concordance, or the percentage of patients who received their preferred screening approach. Postvisit surveys were administered to assess patient preference for testing, and electronic health record review was used to assess CRC testing at 12 months. Heterogeneity of treatment effect analyses examined interaction between study groups and different factors on concordance rates. Results: This study included 59 physicians and 466 older adults. Physicians had a mean (SD) age of 52.7 (9.4) years and a mean (SD) of 21.6 (10.2) years in practice; 30 (50.8%) were women and 16 (27.1%) reported prior training in SDM. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 80.3 (2.8) years; 249 (53.4%) were women and 238 (51.1%) reported excellent or very good overall health. Patients preferred stool-based tests (161 [34.5%]), followed by colonoscopy (116 [24.8%]) or no further screening (97 [20.8%]); 75 (16.1%) were not sure. The distribution of patient preferences was similar across groups (P = .36). At 12 months, test uptake was also similar for both the intervention group (29 [12.3%] for colonoscopy, 62 [26.3%] for stool-based tests, and 145 [61.4%] for no testing) and the comparator group (32 [13.9%] for colonoscopy, 35 [15.2%] for stool-based tests, and 163 [70.9%] for no testing; P = .08). Approximately half of patients in the intervention group received their preferred approach vs the comparator group (115 of 226 [50.9%] vs 103 of 223 [46.2%]; P = .47). Heterogeneity of treatment effect analyses found significantly higher rates with the intervention vs the comparator for patients with a strong intention to follow through with the preferred approach (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.79 [95% CI, 1.11-2.89]; P = .02, P = .05 for interaction) and for patients who reported more than 5 minutes (AOR, 3.27 [95% CI, 1.25-8.59]; P = .02, P = .05 for interaction) of discussion with their PCP regarding screening. Higher rates were also observed among patients who reported 2 to 5 minutes of discussion with their PCP, although this finding was not significant (AOR, 1.89 [95% CI, 0.93-3.84]; P = .08, P = .05 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, approximately half of older patients received their preferred approach to CRC screening. Physician training in SDM did not result in higher concordance rates overall but may have benefitted some subgroups. Future work to refine and evaluate clinical decision support (in the form of an electronic advisory or reminder) as well as focused SDM skills training for PCPs may promote high-quality, preference-concordant decisions about CRC testing for older adults. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959696.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais , Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Idoso , Feminino , Masculino , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Sistemas de Alerta , Massachusetts , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Médicos de Atenção Primária/educação , Médicos de Atenção Primária/estatística & dados numéricos , MaineRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Guidelines for managing abnormal cervical cancer screening results are complex and adherence is challenging for clinicians. Previous studies have identified gaps in knowledge as a possible cause; few have explored the confidence clinicians have in their management decisions. Confidence in decision-making may influence management practices, particularly when guidelines are complex and evolving. OBJECTIVE: Assess whether confidence in decision-making is associated with making guideline-concordant recommendations for abnormal cervical cancer screening results. DESIGN: A clinician survey used vignettes to ask clinicians to make a management recommendation for different abnormal results and rate their level of confidence in their response. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) at three diverse health systems in Washington, Texas, and Massachusetts. MAIN MEASURES: Correct response to each vignette based on either the 2012 or 2019 American Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) management guidelines. KEY RESULTS: In total, 501 clinicians completed the survey between October and December 2020 (response rate 53.7%). Overall, most clinicians made guideline-recommended management decisions for two vignettes (73.2 and 73.7%), but fewer were confident in their selection (48.3% and 46.6%, respectively). Clinicians who reported high levels of confidence were more often correct than those who reported lower levels of confidence (85.8% vs. 62.2% and 87.5% vs. 60.7%, both p<0.001). After adjusting for clinician and practice characteristics, confidence remained significantly associated with selecting the correct answer. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician confidence in management decisions for abnormal cervical cancer screening results was significantly associated with knowing guideline-concordant recommendations. Given the complexity of cervical cancer management guidelines, solutions to improve clinician confidence in decision-making are needed.
RESUMO
Background: One-time atrial fibrillation (AF) screening trials have produced mixed results; however, it is unclear if there is a subset for whom screening is effective. Identifying such a subgroup would support targeted screening. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of VITAL-AF, a randomized trial of one-time, single-lead ECG screening during primary care visits. We tested two approaches to identify a subgroup where screening is effective. First, we developed an effect-based model using a T-learner. Specifically, we separately predicted the likelihood of AF diagnosis under screening and usual care conditions; the difference in probabilities was the predicted screening effect. Second, we used a validated AF risk model to test for a heterogeneous screening effect. We used interaction testing to determine if observed AF diagnosis rates in the screening and usual care groups differed when stratified by decile of the predicted screening effect and predicted AF risk. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the screening (n=15187) and usual care (n=15078) groups (mean age 74 years, 59% female). In the effect-based analysis, in the highest decile of predicted screening effectiveness (n=3026), AF diagnosis rates were higher in the screening group (6.50 vs. 3.06 per 100 person-years, rate difference 3.45, 95%CI 1.62 to 5.28). In this group, the mean age was 84 years and 68% were female. The risk-based analysis did not identify a subgroup where screening was more effective. Predicted screening effectiveness and predicted baseline AF risk were poorly correlated (Spearman coefficient 0.13). Conclusions: In a secondary analysis of the VITAL-AF trial, we identified a small subgroup where one-time screening was associated with increased AF diagnoses using an effect-based approach. In this study, predicted AF risk was a poor proxy for predicted screening effectiveness. These data caution against the assumption that high AF risk is necessarily correlated with high screening effectiveness.
RESUMO
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic posed serious challenges to cancer screening delivery, including cervical cancer. While the impact of the pandemic on deferred screening has been documented, less is known about how clinicians experienced barriers to screening delivery, and, in particular, the role of pre-pandemic barriers to changes reported during the pandemic. Methods: Survey of clinicians who performed ≥ 10 cervical cancer screening tests in 2019 from Mass General Brigham, Kaiser Permanente Washington, and Parkland Health, the healthcare systems participating in the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium (administered 10/2020-12/2020, response rate 53.7 %). Results: Prior to the pandemic, clinicians commonly noted barriers to the delivery of cervical cancer screening including lack of staff support (57.6%), interpreters (32.5%), resources to support patients with social barriers to care (61.3%), and discrimination or bias in interactions between staff and patients (31.2%). Clinicians who reported experiencing a given barrier to care before the pandemic were more likely than those who did not experience one to report worsening during the pandemic: lack of staff support (odds ratio 4.70, 95% confidence interval 2.94-7.52); lack of interpreters (8.23, 4.46-15.18); lack of resources to support patients in overcoming social barriers (7.65, 4.41-13.27); and discrimination or bias (6.73, 3.03-14.97). Conclusions: Clinicians from three health systems who deliver cervical cancer screening commonly reported barriers to care. Barriers prior to the pandemic were associated with worsening of barriers during the pandemic. Addressing barriers to cervical cancer screening may promote resilience of care delivery during the next public health emergency.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Single-lead electrocardiograms (1L ECGs) are increasingly used for atrial fibrillation (AF) detection. Automated 1L ECG interpretation may have prognostic value for future AF in cases in which screening does not result in a short-term AF diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the association between automated 1L ECG interpretation and incident AF. METHODS: VITAL-AF was a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of screening for AF by 1L ECGs. For this study, participants were divided into 4 groups based on automated classification of 1L ECGs. Patients with prevalent AF were excluded. Associations between groups and incident AF were assessed by Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for risk factors. The start of follow-up was defined as 60 days after the latest 1L ECG (as some individuals had numerous screening 1L ECGs). RESULTS: The study sample included never screened (n = 16,306), normal (n = 10,914), other (n = 2675), and possible AF (n = 561). Possible AF had the highest AF incidence (5.91 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.24-8.23). Possible AF was associated with greater hazard of incident AF compared with normal (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.66-3.71). Other was associated with greater hazard of incident AF compared with normal (1.41; 95% CI, 1.04-1.90). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing AF screening with 1L ECGs without prevalent AF or AF within 60 days of screening, presumptive positive and indeterminate 1L ECG interpretations were associated with future AF. Abnormal 1L ECG recordings may identify individuals at higher risk for future AF.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Eletrocardiografia , Humanos , Fibrilação Atrial/diagnóstico , Fibrilação Atrial/fisiopatologia , Fibrilação Atrial/epidemiologia , Eletrocardiografia/métodos , Masculino , Feminino , Incidência , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Prognóstico , Fatores de Risco , Seguimentos , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Medição de Risco/métodosRESUMO
Purpose: We examined characteristics of clinicians caring for transgender men and nonbinary (TMNB) individuals and guideline concordance of clinicians' cervical cancer screening recommendations. Methods: Using a survey of clinicians who performed ≥10 cervical cancer screenings in 2019, we studied characteristics of clinicians who do versus do not report caring for TMNB individuals and guideline concordance of screening recommendations for TMNB individuals with a cervix versus cisgender women. Results: In our sample (N = 492), 49.2% reported caring for TMNB individuals, and 25.4% reported performing cervical cancer screening for TMNB individuals with a cervix. Differences in guideline concordance of screening recommendations for TMNB individuals with a cervix versus cisgender women (45.8% vs. 50% concordant) were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Sizable proportions of clinicians cared for and performed cervical cancer screening for TMNB individuals. Research is needed to better understand clinicians' identified knowledge deficits to develop interventions (e.g., clinician trainings) to improve gender-affirming cervical cancer prevention.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Eletrocardiografia , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Humanos , Fibrilação Atrial/diagnóstico , Idoso , Eletrocardiografia/métodos , Masculino , Feminino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Recursos em SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Follow-up of abnormal results is essential to cervical cancer screening, but data on adherence to follow-up are limited. We describe patterns of follow-up after screening abnormalities and identify predictors of guideline-concordant follow-up. METHODS: We identified the index screening abnormality (positive human papillomavirus test or atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or more severe cytology) among women of ages 25 to 65 years at three US healthcare systems during 2010 to 2019. We estimated the cumulative incidence of surveillance testing, colposcopy, or treatment after the index abnormality and initial colposcopy. Logistic regressions were fit to identify predictors of guideline-concordant follow-up according to contemporaneous guidelines. RESULTS: Among 43,007 patients with an index abnormality, the cumulative incidence of any follow-up was 49.6% by 4 years for those with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/human papillomavirus-negative and higher for abnormalities warranting immediate colposcopy. The 1-year cumulative incidence of any follow-up after colposcopy was 70% for patients with normal results or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia I and 90% for patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II+. Rates of concordant follow-up after screening and colposcopy were 52% and 47%, respectively. Discordant follow-up was associated with factors including age, race/ethnicity, overweight/obese body mass index, and specific types of public payor coverage or being uninsured. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to the recommended follow-up of cytologic and histopathologic abnormalities is inconsistent in clinical practice. Concordance was poor for mild abnormalities and improved, although suboptimal, for more severe abnormalities. IMPACT: There remain gaps in the cervical cancer screening process in clinical practice. Further study is needed to understand the barriers to the appropriate management of cervical abnormalities.
Assuntos
Colposcopia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero , Humanos , Feminino , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/epidemiologia , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/patologia , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/virologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Idoso , Colposcopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Infecções por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Papillomavirus/virologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Secondary prevention interventions to reduce post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) can be aided by the early identification of high-risk individuals who would benefit from risk factor modification. AIMS: To develop and evaluate a predictive model to identify patients at increased risk of PSCI over 5 years using data easily accessible from electronic health records. METHODS: Cohort study that included primary care patients from two academic medical centers. Patients were aged 45 years or older, without prior stroke or prevalent cognitive impairment, with primary care visits and an incident ischemic stroke between 2003 and 2016 (development/internal validation cohort) or 2010 and 2022 (external validation cohort). Predictors of PSCI were ascertained from the electronic health record. The outcome was incident dementia/cognitive impairment within 5 years and beginning 3 months following stroke, ascertained using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision (ICD-9/10) codes. For model variable selection, we considered potential predictors of PSCI and constructed 400 bootstrap samples with two-thirds of the model derivation sample. We ran 10-fold cross-validated Cox proportional hazards models using a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) penalty. Variables selected in >25% of samples were included. RESULTS: The analysis included 332 incident diagnoses of PSCI in the development cohort (n = 3741), and 161 and 128 incident diagnoses in the internal (n = 1925) and external (n = 2237) validation cohorts, respectively. The C-statistic for predicting PSCI was 0.731 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.694-0.768) in the internal validation cohort, and 0.724 (95% CI: 0.681-0.766) in the external validation cohort. A risk score based on the beta coefficients of predictors from the development cohort stratified patients into low (0-7 points), intermediate (8-11 points), and high (12-23 points) risk groups. The hazard ratios (HRs) for incident PSCI were significantly different by risk categories in internal (high, HR: 6.2, 95% CI: 4.1-9.3; Intermediate, HR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.8-4.1) and external (high, HR: 6.1, 95% CI: 3.9-9.6; Intermediate, HR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.9-4.3) validation cohorts. CONCLUSION: Five-year risk of PSCI can be accurately predicted using routinely collected data. Model output can be used to risk stratify and identify individuals at increased risk for PSCI for preventive efforts. DATA ACCESS STATEMENT: Mass General Brigham data contain protected health information and cannot be shared publicly. The data processing scripts used to perform analyses will be made available to interested researchers upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.
Assuntos
Disfunção Cognitiva , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Disfunção Cognitiva/epidemiologia , Disfunção Cognitiva/etiologia , Disfunção Cognitiva/diagnóstico , Idoso , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/complicações , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Estudos de Coortes , Fatores de Risco , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Prevenção Secundária , Idoso de 80 Anos ou maisRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Understand how physicians' uncertainty tolerance (UT) in clinical care relates to their personal characteristics, perceptions and practices regarding shared decision making (SDM). METHODS: As part of a trial of SDM training about colorectal cancer screening, primary care physicians (n = 67) completed measures of their uncertainty tolerance in medical practice (Anxiety subscale of the Physician's Reactions to Uncertainty Scale, PRUS-A), and their SDM self-efficacy (confidence in SDM skills). Patients (N = 466) completed measures of SDM (SDM Process scale) after a clinical visit. Bivariate regression analyses and multilevel regression analyses examined relationships. RESULTS: Higher UT was associated with greater physician age (p = .01) and years in practice (p = 0.015), but not sex or race. Higher UT was associated with greater SDM self-efficacy (p < 0.001), but not patient-reported SDM. CONCLUSION: Greater age and practice experience predict greater physician UT, suggesting that UT might be improved through training, while UT is associated with greater confidence in SDM, suggesting that improving UT might improve SDM. However, UT was unassociated with patient-reported SDM, raising the need for further studies of these relationships. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Developing and implementing training interventions aimed at increasing physician UT may be a promising way to promote SDM in clinical care.
Assuntos
Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada , Médicos de Atenção Primária , Humanos , Lactente , Incerteza , Tomada de Decisões , Participação do Paciente , Relações Médico-PacienteRESUMO
Importance: Secondary prevention interventions to reduce post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) can be aided by the early identification of high-risk individuals who would benefit from risk factor modification. Objective: To develop and evaluate a predictive model to identify patients at increased risk of PSCI over 5 years using data easily accessible from electronic health records. Design: Cohort study with patients enrolled between 2003-2016 with follow-up through 2022. Setting: Primary care practices affiliated with two academic medical centers. Participants: Individuals 45 years or older, without prior stroke or prevalent cognitive impairment, with primary care visits and an incident ischemic stroke between 2003-2016 (development/internal validation cohort) or 2010-2022 (external validation cohort). Exposures: Predictors of PSCI were ascertained from the electronic health record. Main Outcome: The outcome was incident dementia/cognitive impairment within 5 years and beginning 3 months following stroke, ascertained using ICD-9/10 codes. For model variable selection, we considered potential predictors of PSCI and constructed 400 bootstrap samples with two-thirds of the model derivation sample. We ran 10-fold cross-validated Cox proportional hazards models using a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) penalty. Variables selected in >25% of samples were included. Results: The analysis included 332 incident diagnoses of PSCI in the development cohort (n=3,741), and 161 and 128 incident diagnoses in the internal (n=1,925) and external (n=2,237) validation cohorts. The c-statistic for predicting PSCI was 0.731 (95% CI: 0.694-0.768) in the internal validation cohort, and 0.724 (95% CI: 0.681-0.766) in the external validation cohort. A risk score based on the beta coefficients of predictors from the development cohort stratified patients into low (0-7 points), intermediate (8-11 points), and high (12-35 points) risk groups. The hazard ratios for incident PSCI were significantly different by risk categories in internal (High, HR: 6.2, 95% CI 4.1-9.3; Intermediate, HR 2.7, 95% CI: 1.8-4.1) and external (High, HR: 6.1, 95% CI: 3.9-9.6; Intermediate, HR 2.8, 95% CI: 1.9-4.3) validation cohorts. Conclusions and Relevance: Five-year risk of PSCI can be accurately predicted using routinely collected data. Model output can be used to risk stratify and identify individuals at increased risk for PSCI for preventive efforts.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Identify if primary care physicians (PCPs) accurately understand patient preferences for colorectal cancer (CRC) testing, whether shared decision making (SDM) training improves understanding of patient preferences, and whether time spent discussing CRC testing improves understanding of patient preferences. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a trial comparing SDM training plus a reminder arm to a reminder alone arm. PCPs and their patients completed surveys after visits assessing whether they discussed CRC testing, patient testing preference, and time spent discussing CRC testing. We compared patient and PCP responses, calculating concordance between patient-physician dyads. Multilevel models tested for differences in preference concordance by arm or time discussing CRC. RESULTS: 382 PCP and patient survey dyads were identified. Most dyads agreed on whether CRC testing was discussed (82%). Only 52% of dyads agreed on the patient's preference. SDM training did not impact accuracy of PCPs preference diagnoses (55%v.48%,p = 0.22). PCPs were more likely to accurately diagnose patient's preferences when discussions occurred, regardless of length. CONCLUSION: Only half of PCPs accurately identified patient testing preferences. Training did not impact accuracy. Visits where CRC testing was discussed resulted in PCPs better understanding patient preferences. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: PCPs should take time to discuss testing and elicit patient preferences.
Assuntos
Neoplasias do Colo , Neoplasias Colorretais , Médicos , Humanos , Neoplasias do Colo/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Preferência do PacienteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: While nonpharmacologic treatments are increasingly endorsed as first-line therapy for low back pain (LBP) in clinical practice guidelines, it is unclear if use of these treatments is increasing or equitable. OBJECTIVE: Examine national trends in chiropractic care and physical rehabilitation (occupational/physical therapy (OT/PT)) use among adults with LBP. DESIGN/SETTING: Serial cross-sectional analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 2002 to 2018. PARTICIPANTS: 146,087 adults reporting LBP in prior 3 months. METHODS: We evaluated the association of survey year with chiropractic care or OT/PT use in prior 12 months. Logistic regression with multilevel linear splines was used to determine if chiropractic care or OT/PT use increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines. We also examined trends in use by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. When trends were similar over time, we present differences by these demographic characteristics as unadjusted ORs using data from all respondents. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2018, less than one-third of adults with LBP reported use of either chiropractic care or OT/PT. Rates did not change until 2016 when uptake increased with the introduction of clinical guidelines (2016-2018 vs 2002-2015, OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.10-1.19). Trends did not differ significantly by sex, race, or ethnicity (p for interactions > 0.05). Racial and ethnic disparities in chiropractic care or OT/PT use were identified and persisted over time. For example, compared to non-Hispanic adults, either chiropractic care or OT/PT use was lower among Hispanic adults (combined OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.65-0.73). By contrast, compared to White adults, Black adults had similar OT/PT use (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.94-1.03) but lower for chiropractic care use (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.47-0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Although use of chiropractic care or OT/PT for LBP increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines in 2016, only about a third of US adults with LBP reported using these services between 2016 and 2018 and disparities in use have not improved.
Assuntos
Quiroprática , Dor Lombar , Adulto , Humanos , Estudos Transversais , Etnicidade , Dor Lombar/terapia , Estados Unidos , Grupos RaciaisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Consumer wearable devices with health and wellness features are increasingly common and may enhance disease detection and management. Yet studies informing relationships between wearable device use, attitudes toward device data, and comprehensive clinical profiles are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: WATCH-IT (Wearable Activity Tracking for Comprehensive Healthcare-Integrated Technology) studied adults receiving longitudinal primary or ambulatory cardiovascular care in the Mass General Brigham health care system from January 2010 to July 2021. Participants completed a 20-question electronic survey about perceptions and use of consumer wearable devices, with responses linked to electronic health records. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with device use. Among 214 992 individuals receiving longitudinal primary or cardiovascular care with an active electronic portal, 11 121 responded (5.2%). Most respondents (55.8%) currently used a wearable device, and most nonusers (95.3%) would use a wearable if provided at no cost. Although most users (70.2%) had not shared device data with their doctor previously, most believed it would be very (20.4%) or moderately (34.4%) important to share device-related health information with providers. In multivariable models, older age (odds ratio [OR], 0.80 per 10-year increase [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]), male sex (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.80-0.95]), and heart failure (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63-0.89]) were associated with lower odds of wearable device use, whereas higher median income (OR, 1.08 per 1-quartile increase [95% CI, 1.04-1.12]) and care in a cardiovascular medicine clinic (OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.05-1.30]) were associated with greater odds of device use. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in primary and cardiovascular medicine clinics, consumer wearable device use is common, and most users perceive value in wearable health data.
Assuntos
Dispositivos Eletrônicos Vestíveis , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Inquéritos e Questionários , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Atitude , Atenção à SaúdeRESUMO
Importance: Realizing the benefits of cancer screening requires testing of eligible individuals and processes to ensure follow-up of abnormal results. Objective: To test interventions to improve timely follow-up of overdue abnormal breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening results. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at 44 primary care practices within 3 health networks in the US enrolling patients with at least 1 abnormal cancer screening test result not yet followed up between August 24, 2020, and December 13, 2021. Intervention: Automated algorithms developed using data from electronic health records (EHRs) recommended follow-up actions and times for abnormal screening results. Primary care practices were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to (1) usual care, (2) EHR reminders, (3) EHR reminders and outreach (a patient letter was sent at week 2 and a phone call at week 4), or (4) EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation (a patient letter was sent at week 2 and a navigator outreach phone call at week 4). Patients, physicians, and practices were unblinded to treatment assignment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was completion of recommended follow-up within 120 days of study enrollment. The secondary outcomes included completion of recommended follow-up within 240 days of enrollment and completion of recommended follow-up within 120 days and 240 days for specific cancer types and levels of risk. Results: Among 11â¯980 patients (median age, 60 years [IQR, 52-69 years]; 64.8% were women; 83.3% were White; and 15.4% were insured through Medicaid) with an abnormal cancer screening test result for colorectal cancer (8245 patients [69%]), cervical cancer (2596 patients [22%]), breast cancer (1005 patients [8%]), or lung cancer (134 patients [1%]) and abnormal test results categorized as low risk (6082 patients [51%]), medium risk (3712 patients [31%]), or high risk (2186 patients [18%]), the adjusted proportion who completed recommended follow-up within 120 days was 31.4% in the EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation group (n = 3455), 31.0% in the EHR reminders and outreach group (n = 2569), 22.7% in the EHR reminders group (n = 3254), and 22.9% in the usual care group (n = 2702) (adjusted absolute difference for comparison of EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation group vs usual care, 8.5% [95% CI, 4.8%-12.0%], P < .001). The secondary outcomes showed similar results for completion of recommended follow-up within 240 days and by subgroups for cancer type and level of risk for the abnormal screening result. Conclusions and Relevance: A multilevel primary care intervention that included EHR reminders and patient outreach with or without patient navigation improved timely follow-up of overdue abnormal cancer screening test results for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03979495.
Assuntos
Diagnóstico Tardio , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Comunicação em Saúde , Neoplasias , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Sistemas de Alerta , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/métodos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Assistência ao Convalescente , Fatores de Tempo , Diagnóstico Tardio/prevenção & controle , Diagnóstico Tardio/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Ensaios Clínicos Pragmáticos como Assunto , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Idoso , Sistemas de Alerta/estatística & dados numéricos , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Navegação de Pacientes , Comunicação em Saúde/métodosRESUMO
Background: Lifestyle modification programs, such as cardiac rehabilitation, may reduce atrial fibrillation (AF) burden and improve quality of life (QOL), but remain unproven. The objective of this pilot study was to assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of an exercise and nutrition-based cardiac rehabilitation-like program for AF patients. Methods: We enrolled overweight adults aged ≥ 30 years with symptomatic AF in a 12-week cardiac lifestyle group program, including 6 virtual and 6 in-person visits. All visits included discussion and education about nutrition, exercise, and behavior modification. In-person visits included supervised aerobic exercise and strength training. Outcomes at baseline and 12 weeks included feasibility of participation, acceptability, change in weight and BMI, and changes in survey-based AF burden, symptoms, and QOL. Results: From 84 invitees, 11 (13.1%) were enrolled (mean age 64; baseline BMI 38 kg/m2); 9 (82%) completed the program. Patients attended an average of 9.7 (81%) visits (Range: 6-11). Mean weight loss was 9.1 pounds (Range: 0-16); mean BMI decrease was 1.4 kg/m2 (Range: 0-2.6). Patients found the program helpful overall: all reported making diet and exercise changes during the program. Compared to baseline, patients reported decreased AF burden (12.9 vs. 11.7, p = 0.03) and symptom (10.1 vs. 5.6, p = 0.003) scores at the conclusion of the program. Patients also reported increased QOL overall (68.9 vs. 86.4, p = 0.001). Conclusions: Participation in a cardiac rehab-like program was feasible and acceptable for overweight patients with symptomatic AF. Results suggest preliminary effectiveness of the program for reducing AF burden and symptoms and increasing QOL.
RESUMO
Background: Despite benefits of oral anticoagulation (OAC), many individuals with diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) do not receive OAC. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess whether cardiac rhythm assessment for AF impacted use of OAC in patients with previously diagnosed AF. Methods: VITAL-AF was a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 16 primary care practices assessing the efficacy of AF rhythm assessment with single-lead electrocardiogram in routine care. Patients 65 years and older were offered rhythm assessment at visits. In this secondary analysis, we evaluated rhythm assessment uptake and compared initiation and discontinuation of OAC in patients with previously diagnosed AF from intervention and control arms over 1 year. Results: The study included 4593 patients with previously diagnosed AF (2250 intervention; 2343 control). In the intervention arm, 2022 (89.9%) completed rhythm assessment (median 2 visits with rhythm assessment) and 40.1% had ≥1 "Possible AF" result. Initiation of OAC was similar in the intervention (17.7%) and control (19.1%) arms but was influenced by the rhythm assessment result: higher with a "Possible AF" (26.1%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-2.51), and lower with a "Normal" result (9.9%; aOR 0.45; 95% CI 0.29-0.71) compared to control. OAC discontinuation was similar in the intervention (6.3%) and control (7.2%) arms, with lower discontinuation with a "Possible AF" result (3.8%; aOR 0.51; 95% CI 0.32-0.81). Conclusions: Including patients with previously diagnosed AF in a point-of-care rhythm assessment strategy did not increase overall OAC use compared to the control arm. However, the rhythm assessment result influenced both initiation and discontinuation of OAC.