Search

Background: Medicines are often suboptimally managed for heart failure patients across the transition from hospital to home, potentially leading to poor patient outcomes. The Improving the Safety and Continuity Of Medicines management at Transitions of care programme included: understanding the problems faced by patients and healthcare professionals; developing and co‐designing the Medicines at Transitions of care Intervention (MaTI); a cluster randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of a complex behavioural MaTI aimed at improving medicines management at the interface between hospitals discharge and community care for patients with heart failure; and a process evaluation. The MaTI included a patient‐held My Medicines Toolkit; enhanced communication between the hospital and the patient's community pharmacist and increased engagement of the community pharmacist postdischarge. This paper reports on the patients' experiences of the MaTI and its implementation from the process evaluation. Design: Twenty one‐to‐one semi‐structured patient interviews from six intervention sites were conducted between November 2018 and January 2020. Data were analysed using the Framework method, involving patients as co‐analysts. Interview data were triangulated with routine trial data, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and a logic model. Results: Within the hospital setting patients engaged with the toolkit according to whether staff raised awareness of the My Medicines Toolkit's importance and the time and place of its introduction. Patients' engagement with community pharmacy depended on their awareness of the community pharmacist's role, support sources and perceptions of involvement in medicines management. The toolkit's impact on patients' medicines management at home included reassurance during gaps in care, increased knowledge of medicines, enhanced ability to monitor health and seek support and supporting sharing medicines management between formal and informal care networks. Conclusion: Many patients perceived that the MaTI offered them support in their medicines management when transitioning from hospital into the community. Importantly, it can be incorporated into and built upon patients' lived experiences of heart failure. Key to its successful implementation is the quality of engagement of healthcare professionals in introducing the intervention. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients were involved in the study design, as qualitative data co‐analysts and as co‐authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The primary goals in conducting clinical trials of treatments for alcohol use disorders ( AUDs) are to identify efficacious treatments and determine which treatments are most efficacious for which patients. Accurate reporting of study design features and results is imperative to enable readers of research reports to evaluate to what extent a study has achieved these goals. Guidance on quality of clinical trial reporting has evolved substantially over the past 2 decades, primarily through the publication and widespread adoption of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. However, there is room to improve the adoption of those standards in reporting the design and findings of treatment trials for AUD. Methods This paper provides a narrative review of guidance on reporting quality in AUD treatment trials. Results Despite improvements in the reporting of results of treatment trials for AUD over the past 2 decades, many published reports provide insufficient information on design or methods. Conclusions The reporting of alcohol treatment trial design, analysis, and results requires improvement in 4 primary areas: (i) trial registration, (ii) procedures for recruitment and retention, (iii) procedures for randomization and intervention design considerations, and (iv) statistical methods used to assess treatment efficacy. Improvements in these areas and the adoption of reporting standards by authors, reviewers, and editors are critical to an accurate assessment of the reliability and validity of treatment effects. Continued developments in this area are needed to move AUD treatment research forward via systematic reviews and meta-analyses that maximize the utility of completed studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Over the past 60 years, the view that 'alcoholism' is a disease for which the only acceptable goal of treatment is abstinence has given way to the recognition that alcohol use disorders ( AUDs) occur on a continuum of severity, for which a variety of treatment options are appropriate. However, because the available treatments for AUDs are not effective for everyone, more research is needed to develop novel and more efficacious treatments to address the range of AUD severity in diverse populations. Here we offer recommendations for the design and analysis of alcohol treatment trials, with a specific focus on the careful conduct of randomized clinical trials of medications and nonpharmacological interventions for AUDs. Methods This paper provides a narrative review of the quality of published clinical trials and recommendations for the optimal design and analysis of treatment trials for AUDs. Results Despite considerable improvements in the design of alcohol clinical trials over the past 2 decades, many studies of AUD treatments have used faulty design features and statistical methods that are known to produce biased estimates of treatment efficacy. Conclusions The published statistical and methodological literatures provide clear guidance on methods to improve clinical trial design and analysis. Consistent use of state-of-the-art design features and analytic approaches will enhance the internal and external validity of treatment trials for AUDs across the spectrum of severity. The ultimate result of this attention to methodological rigor is that better treatment options will be identified for patients with an AUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care settings like federally qualified health centers (FQHC) are optimal locations to identify individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) and link them to SUD treatment, yet successful linkage has proven difficult. Recovery management checkups for primary care (RMC‐PC) is a promising method for increasing linkage to care, engagement in treatment, and reducing substance use. Methods: Participants (n = 266) who received screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) at four FQHC sites and needed SUD treatment were randomized to receive SBIRT only or SBIRT+RMC‐PC. All participants received SBIRT prior to randomization as part of usual care while those in the experimental group also received quarterly checkups. All participants completed research interviews at enrollment and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post‐enrollment. The primary outcome was whether participants received any days of SUD treatment. Key secondary outcomes were days of SUD treatment (total and by SUD level of care), days of alcohol or drug abstinence, and a reduction in days of specific substance use, all based on self‐report. Results: Relative to participants receiving SBIRT only, participants assigned to SBIRT+RMC‐PC were significantly more likely to have received any SUD treatment over 12 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.85) and more days of SUD treatment over 12 months (Cohen's effect size d = +0.41). The SBIRT+RMC‐PC group also reported significantly more days of abstinence over 12 months (d = +0.30), fewer days of alcohol use (d = −0.20) and cannabis use (d = −0.20), and lower combined substance use frequency (d = −0.25). Days of treatment were found to positively mediate the direct effect of SBIRT+RMC‐PC on days of abstinence. Conclusion: This study provides further evidence of the effectiveness of the "referral to treatment" component of SBIRT when combined with RMC for patients in primary care settings, including those with drug use problems. Moreover, results demonstrate the value of repeated checkups on longer‐term treatment and substance use outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Experts estimate that the prevalence of antibiotics use exceeds the prevalence of bacterial acute respiratory infections (ARIs). To develop, adapt and validate DECISION+ and estimate its impact on the decision of family physicians (FPs) and their patients on whether to use antibiotics for ARIs. Two-arm parallel clustered pilot randomized controlled trial. Four family medicine groups were randomized to immediate DECISION+ participation (the experimental group) or delayed DECISION+ participation (the control group). Thirty-three FPs and 459 patients participated. DECISION+ is a multiple-component, continuing professional development program in shared decision making that addresses the use of antibiotics for ARIs. Throughout the pilot trial, DECISION+ was adapted in response to participant feedback. After the consultation, patients and FPs independently self-reported the decision (immediate use, delayed use, or no use of antibiotics) and its quality. Agreement between their decisional conflict was assessed. Two weeks later, patients assessed their decisional regret and health status. Compared to the control group, the experimental group reduced its immediate use of antibiotics (49 vs. 33% absolute difference = 16%; P = 0.08). Decisional conflict agreement was stronger in the experimental group (absolute difference of Pearson's r = 0.26; P = 0.06). Decisional regret and perceptions of the quality of the decision and of health status in the two groups were similar. DECISION+ was developed successfully and appears to reduce the use of antibiotics for ARIs without affecting patients' outcomes. A larger trial is needed to confirm this observation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study examined the feasibility of a parallel‐group assessor‐blinded randomized controlled trial investigating whether task‐specific training preceded by aerobic exercise (AEX + TST) improves upper limb function more than task‐specific training (TST) alone. Methods: People with upper limb motor dysfunction after stroke were allocated to TST or AEX + TST. Both groups were prescribed 60 hr of TST over 10 weeks (3 × 1‐hr sessions with a therapist per week and 3 × 1 hr of home‐based self‐practice per week). The AEX + TST group performed 30 minutes of aerobic exercise immediately prior to the 1 hr of TST with the therapist. Recruitment, adherence, retention, participant acceptability, and adverse events were recorded. Clinical measures were performed prerandomization at baseline, on completion of the intervention, and at 1‐ and 6‐month follow‐up. Results: Fifty‐nine persons after stroke were screened, 42 met the eligibility criteria, and 20 (11 male; mean [SD] age: 55.4 [16.0] years; time since stroke: 71.7 [91.2] months) were recruited over 17 months. The mean Wolf Motor Function Test Functional Ability Score at baseline was 27.4 (max = 75) and the mean Action Research Arm Test score was 11.2 (max = 57). Nine were randomized to AEX + TST and 11 to TST. There were no adverse events, but there was one drop out. Retention at 1‐ and 6‐month follow‐up was 80% and 85%, respectively. Attendance was 93% (6) for the AEX + TST group, and 89% (9) for the TST group. AEX + TST was perceived as acceptable (100%) and beneficial (87.5%). Exertional fatigue (visual analogue scale) prior to TST was worse in the AEX + TST group (3.5 [0.7] out of 10) than the TST group (1.7 [1.4] out of 10). The TST group performed 31% more repetitions per session than the AEX + TST group. Conclusion: A subsequent Phase III study is feasible, but modifications to eligibility criteria, outcome measures, and intervention delivery are recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]