Search

Background: Perioperative blood glucose control has been demonstrated to influence outcomes following spine surgery, though this association has not been fully elucidated in patients with traumatic spine injuries. This study sought to determine the association between perioperative blood glucose levels and complications or outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery due to injury. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted to identify patients who underwent spine surgery due to traumatic injuries between 1 March 2020 and 29 September 2022 at a single academic institution. Descriptive factors, complications, and outcomes were compared between those with a postoperative blood glucose level of <200 mg/dL and those with a preoperative glucose of <200 mg/dL. Results: Patients with a post- and preoperative blood glucose of ≥200 mg/dL had significantly higher odds of respiratory complications (OR = 2.1, 2.1, P = 0.02, 0.03), skin/wound complications (OR = 2.2, 2.8, P = 0.04, 0.03), and increased hospital length of stay (OR = 9.6, 12.1, P = 0.02, 0.03) compared with those with blood glucose of <200 mg/dL. Those with postoperative glucose ≥200 mg/dL also had significantly higher odds of inpatient mortality (OR = 4.5, P = 0.04) when controlling for confounding factors. Neither pre- nor postoperative blood glucose of ≥200 mg/dL was associated with an improvement in American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale score at the final follow-up when controlling for multiple confounding factors (P = 0.44, 0.06). Conclusion: Elevated blood glucose both pre- and postoperatively was associated with an increased rate of postoperative complications and negative postoperative outcomes. However, there was no association between elevated blood glucose levels and neurological recovery following traumatic spinal injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although therapeutic inertia is a known driver of suboptimal type 2 diabetes control, little is known about how to combat this phenomenon. We analyzed randomized trial data to determine whether a comprehensive telehealth intervention was more effective than a less structured telehealth approach (telemonitoring and care coordination) at promoting treatment intensification in poorly controlled diabetes. Methods: Patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes were randomized 1:1 to telemonitoring/care coordination or a comprehensive telehealth intervention, which included an active, study provider-guided medication management component. Prospectively collected medication lists were used to determine whether treatment intensification occurred for each patient during 3-month intervals throughout the study period. To examine between-arm differences in treatment intensification over time, we fit a generalized estimation equation model. In each arm, hemoglobin A1c levels at the beginning and end of each 3-month interval were used to distinguish between therapeutic inertia and potentially appropriate nonintensification of treatment. Results: The mean, model-estimated likelihood of treatment intensification during 3-month intervals was 61.3% in the comprehensive telehealth group versus 48.6% for telemonitoring/care coordination (odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.2; p = 0.0007), with no evidence that treatment effect varied over time (p = 0.54). Treatment intervals with observed therapeutic inertia were more common in the telemonitoring/care coordination arm than the comprehensive telehealth arm (116/300, 39% vs. 57/275, 21%). Conclusions: A comprehensive telehealth approach that integrated protocol-guided medication management increased treatment intensification and reduced therapeutic inertia compared with a less structured telehealth approach. The studied approaches may serve as examples of how systems might use telehealth to combat therapeutic inertia. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03520413.

Objective: To assess the feasibility of a family-involved intervention, family support in mental health recovery (FAMILIAR), for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) seeking psychotherapy at a single Veterans Administration Health System., Method: This mixed-methods study reports qualitative and quantitative findings from a single-group pilot of 24 veterans and their support partners (SPs) about experiences with the intervention and interviews with eight VA mental health clinicians and leaders and the study interventionist to explore intervention feasibility. Findings across data sources were merged within domains of Bowen and colleagues' pilot study feasibility framework., Results: Out of 24 dyads, 16 veterans and 15 associated SPs completed the intervention. Participants viewed the intervention to be valuable and feasible. Veterans and SPs reported that they enrolled in the study to develop a shared understanding of PTSD and treatment. While participants identified few logistical barriers, finding a time for conjoint sessions could be a challenge. Veterans, SPs, and providers discussed benefits of the intervention, including that it facilitated conversation between the veteran and SP about PTSD and mental health care and helped to prepare the dyad for treatment. Providers noted potential challenges integrating family-involved interventions into clinical workflow in VA and suggested the need for additional training and standardized procedures for family-centered care., Conclusions: Our study identified potential implementation facilitators (e.g., standard operating procedures about session documentation, confidentiality, and family ethics) and challenges (e.g., clinical workflow integration) that require further study to bring FAMILIAR into routine clinical care. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).