Search

Objective: We aimed to better understand the challenges related to type 2 diabetes medication-taking through Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)-guided interviews with people with type 2 diabetes with varying degrees of medication-taking. Methods: One-on-one qualitative interviews following a semistructured discussion guide informed by the TDF were conducted. Thirty people with type 2 diabetes in Canada were interviewed, with representation from across the country, of both sexes (47% female), of people with various diabetes durations (mean 12.9 ± 7.9 years), with different types of medication plans (n = 15 on polypharmacy), and with various medication-taking levels (n = 10 each for low-, medium-, and high-engagement groups). Results: Themes related to medication-taking from interviews mapped to 12 of the 14 TDF theme domains, with the exclusion of the knowledge and skills domains. The most prominent domains, as determined by high-frequency themes or themes for which people with low and high medication-taking had contrasting perspectives, were 1) emotion; 2) memory, attention, and decision processes; 3) behavioral regulation; 4) beliefs about consequences; 5) goals; and 6) environmental context and resources. Conclusion: Through our interviews, several areas of focus emerged that may help efforts to increase medication-taking. To validate these findings, future quantitative research is warranted to help support people with type 2 diabetes in overcoming psychological and behavioral barriers to medication-taking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Introduction: Quality improvement interventions demonstrate variable degrees of effectiveness. The aim of this work was to (1) qualitatively explore whether, how, and why an academic detailing intervention could improve evidence uptake and (2) identify perceived changes that occurred to inform outcomes appropriate for quantitative evaluation. Methods: A qualitative process evaluation was conducted involving semistructured interviews with nursing home staff. Interviews were analyzed inductively using the framework method. Results: A total of 29 interviews were conducted across 13 nursing homes. Standard processes to reduce falls are well-known but not fully implemented due to a range of mostly postintentional factors that influence staff behavior. Conflicting expectations around professional roles impeded evidence uptake; physicians report a disconnection between the information they would like to receive and the information communicated; and a high proportion of casual and part-time staff creates challenges for those looking to effect change. These factors are amenable to change in the context of an active, tailored intervention such as academic detailing. This seems especially true when the entire care team is actively engaged and when the intervention can be tailored to the varied determinants of behaviors across different team members. Discussion: Interventions aiming to increase evidence-based practice in the nursing home sector need to move beyond education to explicitly address team functioning and communication. Variability in team functioning requires a flexible intervention with the ability to tailor to individual- and home-level needs. Evaluations in this setting may benefit from measuring changes in team functioning as an early indicator of success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) have defined transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) indications for which there is a clear lack of benefit as rarely appropriate (rA).Objectives: This study sought to investigate the impact of an AUC-based educational intervention on outpatient TTE ordering by cardiologists and primary care providers.Methods: The authors conducted a prospective, investigator-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial of an AUC-based educational intervention aimed at reducing rA outpatient TTEs. The study was conducted at 8 hospitals across 2 countries. The authors randomized cardiologists and primary care providers to receive either intervention or control (no intervention). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of rA TTEs.Results: One hundred and ninety-six physicians were randomized, and 179 were included in the analysis. From December 2014 to April 2016, the authors assessed 14,697 TTEs for appropriateness, of which 99% were classifiable using the 2011 AUC. The mean proportion of rA TTEs was significantly lower in the intervention versus the control group (8.8% vs. 10.1%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57 to 0.99; p = 0.039). In physicians who ordered, on average, at least 1 TTE per month, there was a significantly lower proportion of rA TTEs in the intervention versus the control group (8.6% vs. 11.1%; OR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.99; p = 0.047). There was no difference in the TTE ordering volume between the intervention and control groups (mean 77.7 ± 89.3 vs. 85.4 ± 111.4; p = 0.83).Conclusions: An educational intervention reduced the number of rA TTEs ordered by attending physicians in a variety of ambulatory care environments. This may prove to be an effective strategy to improve the use of imaging. (A Multi-Centered Feedback and Education Intervention Designed to Reduce Inappropriate Transthoracic Echocardiograms [Echo WISELY]; NCT02038101). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to optimize a planned audit and feedback (A&F) intervention for home and community care through incorporating user-centered design principles. Phase 1 comprised the development of a paper prototype, followed by testing of the prototype using semistructured interviews and focus groups. Phase 2 involved the development of a revised and online prototype based on the results of Phase 1, followed by user testing. A total of 39 participants across Phase 1 (n = 33) and Phase 2 (n = 6) provided input into the design of the A&F intervention. Key changes included improving clarity of the variables, reducing cognitive load, and highlighting opportunities for action. Preliminary findings suggest potential usefulness in this approach to optimize home care management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Audit and feedback (AF) interventions that leverage routine administrative data offer a scalable and relatively low-cost method to improve processes of care. AF interventions are usually designed to highlight discrepancies between desired and actual performance and to encourage recipients to act to address such discrepancies. Comparing to a regional average is a common approach, but more recipients would have a discrepancy if compared to a higher-than-average level of performance. In addition, how recipients perceive and respond to discrepancies may depend on how the feedback itself is framed. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of different comparators and framing in feedback on high-risk prescribing in nursing homes.Methods: This is a pragmatic, 2 × 2 factorial, cluster-randomized controlled trial testing variations in the comparator and framing on the effectiveness of quarterly AF in changing high-risk prescribing in nursing homes in Ontario, Canada. We grouped homes that share physicians into clusters and randomized these clusters into the four experimental conditions. Outcomes will be assessed after 6 months; all primary analyses will be by intention-to-treat. The primary outcome (monthly number of high-risk medications received by each patient) will be analysed using a general linear mixed effects regression model. We will present both four-arm and factorial analyses. With 160 clusters and an average of 350 beds per cluster, assuming no interaction and similar effects for each intervention, we anticipate 90% power to detect an absolute mean difference of 0.3 high-risk medications prescribed. A mixed-methods process evaluation will explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, exploring targeted constructs including intention, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, descriptive norms, and goal prioritization. An economic analysis will examine cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the publicly funded health care system.Discussion: This protocol describes the rationale and methodology of a trial testing manipulations of theory-informed components of an audit and feedback intervention to determine how to improve an existing intervention and provide generalizable insights for implementation science.Trial Registration: NCT02979964. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antipsychotic medications are routinely prescribed in nursing homes to address the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. Unfortunately, inappropriate prescribing of antipsychotic medications is common and associated with increased morbidity, adverse drug events, and hospitalizations. Multifaceted interventions can achieve a 12-20 % reduction in antipsychotic prescribing levels in nursing homes. Effective interventions have featured educational outreach and ongoing performance feedback.Methods/design: This pragmatic, cluster-randomized control trial and embedded process evaluation seeks to determine the effect of adding academic detailing to audit and feedback on prescribing of antipsychotic medications in nursing homes, compared with audit and feedback alone. Nursing homes within pre-determined regions of Ontario, Canada, are eligible if they express an interest in the intervention. The academic detailing intervention will be delivered by registered health professionals following an intensive training program including relevant clinical issues and techniques to support health professional behavior change. Physicians in both groups will have the opportunity to access confidential reports summarizing their prescribing patterns for antipsychotics in comparison to the local and provincial average. Participating homes will be allocated to one of the two arms of the study (active/full intervention versus standard audit and feedback) in two waves, with a 2:1 allocation ratio. Homes will be randomized after stratifying for geography, baseline antipsychotic prescription rates, and size, to ensure a balance of characteristics. The primary outcome is antipsychotic dispensing in nursing homes, measured 6 months after allocation; secondary outcomes include clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization.Discussion: Policy-makers and the public have taken note that antipsychotics are used in nursing homes in Ontario far more than other jurisdictions. Academic detailing can be an effective technique to address challenges in appropriate prescribing in nursing homes, but effect sizes vary widely. This opportunistic, policy-driven evaluation, embedded within a government-initiated demonstration project, was designed to ensure policy-makers receive the best evidence possible regarding whether and how to scale up the intervention.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NLM Identifier: NCT02604056 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Competing health concerns present real obstacles to people living with diabetes and other chronic diseases as well as to their primary care providers. Guideline implementation interventions rarely acknowledge this, leaving both patients and providers feeling overwhelmed by the volume of recommended actions. Interprofessional (IP) shared decision-making (SDM) with the use of decision aids may help to set treatment priorities. We developed an evidence-based SDM intervention for patients with diabetes and other conditions that was framed by the IP-SDM model and followed a user-centered approach. Our objective in the present study is to pilot an IP-SDM and goal-setting toolkit following the Knowledge-to-Action Framework to assess (1) intervention fidelity and the feasibility of conducting a larger trial and (2) impact on decisional conflict, diabetes distress, health-related quality of life and patient assessment of chronic illness care.Methods/design: A two-step, parallel-group, clustered randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted, with the primary goal being to assess intervention fidelity and the feasibility of conducting a larger RCT. The first step is a provider-directed implementation only; the second (after a 6-month delay) involves both provider- and patient-directed implementation. Half of the clusters will be assigned to receive the IP-SDM toolkit, and the other will be assigned to be mailed a diabetes guidelines summary. Individual interviews with patients, their family members and health care providers will be conducted upon trial completion to explore toolkit use. A secondary purpose of this trial is to gather estimates of the toolkit's impact on decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes include diabetes distress, quality of life and chronic illness care, which will be assessed on the basis of patient-completed questionnaires of validated scales at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Multilevel hierarchical regression models will be used to account for the clustered nature of the data.Discussion: An individualized approach to patients with multiple chronic conditions using SDM and goal setting is a desirable strategy for achieving guideline-concordant treatment in a patient-centered fashion. Our pilot trial will provide insights regarding strategies for the routine implementation of such interventions in clinical practice, and it will offer an assessment of the impact of this approach.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02379078. Date of Registration: 11 February 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the campaign REWARD ( Reduce research Waste And Reward Diligence) which encourages the researchers to make efforts in reducing waste and maximize efficiency. He mentions the close collaboration between the medical laboratories and health systems' scale and research teams has been implemented.

Background: The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is growing as the population ages, and at least 15% of ischemic strokes are attributed to AF. However, many high-risk AF patients are not offered guideline-recommended stroke prevention therapy due to a variety of system, provider, and patient-level barriers.Methods: We will conduct a pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial randomizing primary care clinics to test a "toolkit" of quality improvement interventions in primary care. In keeping with the recommendations of the chronic care model to simultaneously activate patients and facilitate proactive care by providers, the toolkit includes provider-focused strategies (education, audit and feedback, electronic decision support, and reminders) plus patient-directed strategies (educational letters and reminders). The trial will include two feedback cycles at baseline and approximately 6 months and a final data collection at approximately 12 months. The study will be powered to show a difference of 10% in the primary outcome of proportion of patients receiving guideline-recommended stroke prevention therapy. Analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle and will be blind to treatment allocation. Unit of analysis will be the patient; models will use generalized estimating equations to account for clustering at the clinical level.Discussion: Stroke prevention therapy using anticoagulation in patients with AF is known to reduce strokes by two thirds or more in clinical trials, but most studies indicate under-use of this treatment in real-world practice. If the toolkit successfully improves care for patients with AF, stakeholders will be engaged to facilitate broader application to maximize the potential to improve patient outcomes. The intervention toolkit tested in this project could also provide a model to improve quality of care for other chronic cardiovascular conditions managed in primary care.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01927445 ). Registered August 14, 2014 at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]