Search

Food is Medicine (FIM) programs to improve the accessibility of fruits and vegetables (FVs) or other healthy foods among patients with low income and diet-related chronic diseases are promising to improve food and nutrition security in the United States (US). However, FIM programs are relatively new and implementation guidance for healthcare settings using an implementation science lens is lacking. We used a narrative review to describe the evidence base on barriers and facilitators to FIM program integration in US healthcare settings following the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework. Evidence surrounding the EPIS Inner Context was a focus, including constructs Leadership, Organizational Characteristics, Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support, Organizational Staffing Processes, and Individual Characteristics. Peer-reviewed and grey literature about barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were of interest, defined as programs that screen and refer eligible patients with diet-related chronic disease experiencing food insecurity to healthy, unprepared foods. Thirty-one sources were included in the narrative review, including 22 peer-reviewed articles, four reports, four toolkits, and one thesis. Twenty-eight sources (90%) described EPIS Inner Context facilitators and 26 sources (84%) described FIM program barriers. The most common barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were regarding Quality and Fidelity Monitoring and Support (e.g., use of electronic medical records for tracking and evaluation, strategies to support implementation) and Organizational Staffing Processes (e.g., clear delineation of staff roles and capacity); although, barriers and facilitators to FIM programs were identified among all EPIS Inner Context constructs. We synthesized barriers and facilitators to create an EPIS-informed implementation checklist for healthcare settings for use among healthcare organizations/providers, partner organizations, and technical assistance personnel. We discuss future directions to align FIM efforts with implementation science terminology and theories, models, and frameworks to improve the implementation evidence base and support FIM researchers and practitioners., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The Placebo-controlled Trial of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for the Relief of Stable Angina (ORBITA-2) provided evidence for the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for angina relief in stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) are often used to guide PCI, however their ability to predict placebo-controlled angina improvement is unknown., Methods: Participants with angina, ischemia, and stable CAD were enrolled and antianginal medications were stopped. Participants reported angina episodes daily for 2 weeks using the ORBITA-app. At the research angiogram, FFR and iFR were measured. After sedation and auditory isolation, participants were randomized to PCI or placebo, before entering a 12-week blinded follow-up phase with daily angina reporting. The ability of FFR and iFR, analyzed as continuous variables, to predict the placebo-controlled effect of PCI, was tested using Bayesian proportional odds modelling., Results: Invasive physiology data were available in 279 patients (140 PCI and 139 placebo). The median (IQR) age was 65 years (59.0 to 70.5) and 223 (79.9%) were male. Median FFR was 0.60 (0.46 to 0.73) and median iFR was 0.76 (0.50 to 0.86). The lower the FFR or iFR, the greater the placebo-controlled improvement with PCI across all endpoints. There was strong evidence that a patient with an FFR at the lower quartile would have a greater placebo-controlled improvement in angina symptom score with PCI than a patient at the upper quartile (FFR 0.46 vs. 0.73: OR 2.01, 95% CrI 1.79 to 2.26, Pr(Interaction)>99.9%). Similarly, there was strong evidence that a patient with an iFR at the lower quartile would have a greater placebo controlled improvement in angina symptom score with PCI than a patient with an iFR at the upper quartile (iFR 0.50 vs. 0.86: OR 2.13, 95% CrI 1.87 to 2.45, Pr(Interaction) >99.9%). The relationship between benefit and physiology was seen in both Rose angina and Rose nonangina., Conclusions: Physiological stenosis severity, as measured by FFR and iFR, predicts placebo-controlled angina relief from PCI. Invasive coronary physiology can be used to target PCI to those patients who are most likely to experience benefit.

Despite guideline-based recommendation of the interchangeable use of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide revascularization decision-making, iFR/FFR could demonstrate different physiological or clinical outcomes in some specific patient or lesion subsets. Therefore, we sought to investigate the impact of difference between iFR and FFR-guided revascularization decision-making on clinical outcomes in patients with left main disease (LMD). In this international multicenter registry of LMD with physiological interrogation, we identified 275 patients in whom physiological assessment was performed with both iFR/FFR. Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) was defined as a composite of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The receiver-operating characteristic analysis was performed for both iFR/FFR to predict MACE in respective patients in whom revascularization was deferred and performed. In 153 patients of revascularization deferral, MACE occurred in 17.0% patients. The optimal cut-off values of iFR and FFR to predict MACE were 0.88 (specificity:0.74; sensitivity:0.65) and 0.76 (specificity:0.81; sensitivity:0.46), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was significantly higher for iFR than FFR (0.74; 95%CI 0.62-0.85 vs. 0.62; 95%CI 0.48-0.75; p = 0.012). In 122 patients of coronary revascularization, MACE occurred in 13.1% patients. The optimal cut-off values of iFR and FFR were 0.92 (specificity:0.93; sensitivity:0.25) and 0.81 (specificity:0.047; sensitivity:1.00), respectively. The AUCs were not significantly different between iFR and FFR (0.57; 95%CI 0.40-0.73 vs. 0.46; 95%CI 0.31-0.61; p = 0.43). While neither baseline iFR nor FFR was predictive of MACE in patients in whom revascularization was performed, iFR-guided deferral seemed to be safer than FFR-guided deferral., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Telemedicine programs can provide remote diagnostic information to aid clinical decisions that could optimize care and reduce unplanned readmissions post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Objectives: TELE-ACS (Remote Acute Assessment of Patients With High Cardiovascular Risk Post-Acute Coronary Syndrome) is a randomized controlled trial that aims to compare a telemedicine-based approach vs standard care in patients following ACS., Methods: Patients were suitable for inclusion with at least 1 cardiovascular risk factor and presenting with ACS and were randomized (1:1) before discharge. The primary outcome was time to first readmission at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits, major adverse cardiovascular events, and patient-reported symptoms. The primary analysis was performed according to intention to treat., Results: A total of 337 patients were randomized from January 2022 to April 2023, with a 3.6% drop-out rate. The mean age was 58.1 years. There was a reduced rate of readmission over 6 months (HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.13-0.44; P < 0.001) and ED attendance (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.40-0.89) in the telemedicine arm, and fewer unplanned coronary revascularizations (3% in telemedicine arm vs 9% in standard therapy arm). The occurrence of chest pain (9% vs 24%), breathlessness (21% vs 39%), and dizziness (6% vs 18%) at 6 months was lower in the telemedicine group., Conclusions: The TELE-ACS study has shown that a telemedicine-based approach for the management of patients following ACS was associated with a reduction in hospital readmission, ED visits, unplanned coronary revascularization, and patient-reported symptoms. (Telemedicine in High-Risk Cardiovascular Patients Post-ACS [TELE-ACS]; NCT05015634)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was funded by the British Heart Foundation; King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia via The Saudi Arabian Cultural Bureau (SACB); Sansour Fund, Imperial Healthcare Charity; and the Safwan Sobhan Fund at Imperial College London. TELE-ACS was an investigator-initiated trial sponsored by Imperial College London. All authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

"Food Is Medicine" (FIM) represents a spectrum of food-based interventions integrated into health care for patients with specific health conditions and often social needs. Programs include medically tailored meals, groceries, and produce prescriptions, with varying levels of nutrition and culinary education. Supportive advances include expanded care pathways and payment models, e-screening for food and nutrition security, and curricular and accreditation requirements for medical nutrition education. Evidence supports positive effects of FIM on food insecurity, diet quality, glucose control, hypertension, body weight, disease self-management, self-perceived physical and mental health, and cost-effectiveness or cost savings. However, most studies to date are quasiexperimental or pre/post interventions; larger randomized trials are ongoing. New national and local programs and policies are rapidly accelerating FIM within health care. Remaining research gaps require rigorous, iterative evaluation. Successful incorporation of FIM into health care will require multiparty partnerships to assess, optimize, and scale these promising treatments to advance health and health equity., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (2R01 HL115189). The funder had no role in study conception or design, data analysis or interpretation, manuscript drafting or editing, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Dr Mozaffarian has received research funding from the National Institutes of Health, the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Kaiser Permanente East Bay Community Foundation; has received personal fees from Acasti Pharma and Barilla; has served on the scientific advisory board of Beren Therapeutics, Brightseed, Calibrate, Elysium Health, Filtricine, HumanCo, Instacart Health, January, Perfect Day, Season Health, and Validation Institute; has stock ownership in Calibrate and HumanCo; and receives chapter royalties from UpToDate. Dr Aspry has received research funding from Amgen, Ionis, Novartis, Regeneron, and the American College of Cardiology; and has received speaker honoraria or travel funding from the American College of Cardiology, National Lipid Association, and MedScape. Ms Garfield has received research funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, the Kaiser Permanente East Bay Community Foundation, the M·A·C VIVA GLAM Fund, the Point32Health Foundation, and the Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation; and has received organizational funding from the Food is Medicine Coalition. Dr Seligman has received funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Department of Agriculture, the National Institutes of Health, and Feeding America; and her voucher program receives funding from numerous additional sources, including government programs, private donors, and foundations. Dr Yang has received research grants from Amgen and Microsoft Research; has received consultant fees or honoraria from the American College of Cardiology and Genentech; and has ownership interest, partnership, or principal in Clocktree, Measure Labs, and TenPoint7. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Landmark trials showed that invasive pressure measurement (Fractional Flow Reserve, FFR) was a better guide to coronary stenting than visual assessment. However, present-day interventionists have benefited from extensive research and personal experience of mapping anatomy to hemodynamics., Aims: To determine if visual assessment of the angiogram performs as well as invasive measurement of coronary physiology., Methods: 25 interventional cardiologists independently visually assessed the single vessel coronary disease of 200 randomized participants in The Objective Randomized Blinded Investigation with optimal medical Therapy of Angioplasty in stable angina trial (ORBITA). They gave a visual prediction of the FFR and Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio (iFR), denoted vFFR and viFR respectively. Each judged each lesion on 2 occasions, so that every lesion had 50 vFFR, and 50 viFR assessments. The group consensus visual estimates (vFFR-group and viFR-group) and individual cardiologists' visual estimates (vFFR-individual and viFR-individual) were tested alongside invasively measured FFR and iFR for their ability to predict the placebo-controlled reduction in stress echo ischemia with stenting., Results: Placebo-controlled ischemia improvement with stenting was predicted by vFFR-group (p < 0.0001) and viFR-group (p < 0.0001), vFFR-individual (p < 0.0001) and viFR-individual (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the predictive performance of the group visual estimates and their invasive counterparts: p = 0.53 for vFFR vs FFR and p = 0.56 for viFR vs iFR., Conclusion: Visual assessment of the angiogram by contemporary experts, provides significant additional information on the amount of ischaemia which can be relieved by placebo-controlled stenting in single vessel coronary artery disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Rasha Al-Lamee reports a relationship with A Menarini International Pharmaceutics that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Michael Foley reports a relationship with A Menarini International Pharmaceutics that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Christopher Rajkumar reports a relationship with A Menarini International Pharmaceutics that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Rasha Al-Lamee reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Michael Foley reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Christopher Rajkumar reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Sayan Sen reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Ricardo Petraco reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Sukhjinder Nijjer reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Takayuki Warisawa reports a relationship with Abbott Vascular Japan Co Ltd. that includes: consulting or advisory. Takayuki Warisawa reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes:. Hitoshi Matsuo reports a relationship with Philips Healthcare that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Hitoshi Matsuo reports a relationship with Abbott Vascular Japan Co Ltd. that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Hitoshi Matsuo reports a relationship with Boston Scientific Japan that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Hitoshi Matsuo reports a relationship with Zeon Medical that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Shingo Kuwata reports a relationship with Abbott Vascular Japan Co Ltd. that includes: consulting or advisory., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We examined associations between adolescent self-reported hunger, health risk behaviors, and adverse experiences during the 2018-2019 school year. Youth Risk Behavior Survey data were pooled from 10 states. Prevalence ratios were calculated, and we assessed effect measure modification by sex. The prevalence of self-reported hunger was 13%. Self-reported hunger was associated with a higher prevalence of every health risk behavior/adverse experience analyzed, even after adjusting for sex, grade, and race/ethnicity. Sex did not modify associations. Findings underscore needs for longitudinal research with more robust measures of adolescent food insecurity to clarify the temporality of relationships., Competing Interests: Disclosure Statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Background: Food insecurity (FI) often co-exists with other social risk factors, which makes addressing it particularly challenging. The degree of association between FI and other social risk factors across different levels of income and before and during the COVID-19 pandemic is currently unknown, impeding the ability to design effective interventions for addressing these co-existing social risk factors., Objective: To determine the association between FI and other social risk factors overall and across different levels of income-poverty ratios and before (2019) and during (2020-2021) the pandemic., Design: We used nationally representative data from the 2019-2021 National Health Interview Survey for our cross-sectional analysis. Social risk factors available in NHIS included difficulties paying for medical bills, difficulties paying for medications, receiving income assistance, receiving rental assistance, and "not working last week"., Subjects: 93,047 adults (≥18 years old)., Key Results: Individuals with other social risk factors (except receiving income assistance) were more likely to report FI, even after adjusting for income and education inequalities. While poverty leads to a higher prevalence of FI, associations between FI and other social risk factors were stronger among people with higher incomes, which may be related to their ineligibility for social safety net programs. Associations were similar before and during the pandemic, perhaps due to the extensive provision of social safety net programs during the pandemic., Conclusions: Future research should explore how access to a variety of social safety net programs may impact the association between social risk factors. With the expiration of most pandemic-related social supports, further research and monitoring are also needed to examine FI in the context of increasing food and housing costs. Our findings may also have implications for the expansion of income-based program eligibility criteria and screening for social risk factors across all patients and not only low-income people., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is common, and its prevalence increases with age. It was previously estimated that there are 1.6 million patients in the United States with moderate or worse TR, and more contemporary data suggest the age-adjusted prevalence of TR is 0.55%. Increasing TR severity is associated with an adverse prognosis independent of the pulmonary artery pressure and the degree of right heart failure. In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, survival is significantly worsened when moderate or severe TR is present. The mainstay of therapy has traditionally been surgery, but outcomes are poor. There has been increasing attention on the potential role of transcatheter interventions for TR. Numerous platforms are in developmental evolution, which broadly fall into 3 categories: valve replacement, valve repair (subdivided into annular, leaflet, and chordal platforms), and caval valve implantation. In this review, we examine all these strategies and devices, including guidance on how to appropriately select patients who can benefit from intervention., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Foundation.)

The Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) is a federally funded grant program that provides nutrition incentives-subsidies for purchasing fruits and vegetables (FV)-to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. GusNIP currently advances nutrition equity by improving FV access for people with low incomes, yet inequities exist within GusNIP. We sought to identify inequities in GusNIP at the community, organization, partner, and individual levels and develop recommendations for farm bill provisions to make the program more equitable. In Spring 2021, a group of nutrition incentive experts ( n = 11) from across the country convened to discuss opportunities to enhance equity in GusNIP. The iterative recommendation development process included feedback from key stakeholders ( n = 15) and focus group participants with GusNIP lived experience ( n = 12). Eleven recommendations to advance equity in GusNIP in the farm bill emerged across six categories: (1) increase total GusNIP funding, (2) increase funding and support to lower-resourced organizations and impacted communities, (3) eliminate the match requirement, (4) support statewide expansion, (5) expand and diversify retailer participation, and (6) expand program marketing. Including these recommendations in the upcoming and future farm bills would equitably expand GusNIP for SNAP participants, program grantees, and communities across the country.

Introduction: The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) is among the largest U.S. social safety net programs. Although strong evidence exists regarding the benefits of WIC, take-up (i.e., participation among eligible individuals) has steadily declined in the past decade. This study addresses gaps in our knowledge regarding predictors of WIC take-up during this time., Methods: Data were drawn from the 1998-2017 waves of the National Health Interview Study (NHIS), a serial cross-sectional study of the U.S., Population: The analytic sample included 23,645 children and 10,297 women eligible for WIC based on self-reported demographic characteristics. To investigate predictors of WIC take-up, we regressed self-reported WIC receipt on a range of individual-level predictors (e.g., age, nativity, income) and state- level predictors (e.g., unemployment rate, governor's political affiliation) using multivariable logistic regression. In secondary analyses, results were additionally stratified by race/ethnicity, time period, and age (for children)., Results: For both women and children, older maternal age and higher educational attainment were associated with decreased take-up of WIC. Associations differed by race/ethnicity, time period, and state characteristics including caseload of other social programs (e.g., Medicaid)., Discussion: Our study identifies groups that are less likely to take up WIC benefits for which they are eligible, thereby contributing important evidence to inform programs and policies to increase WIC participation among groups with lower take-up. As WIC evolves past the COVID-19 pandemic, special attention will be needed to ensure that resources to encourage and support the participation of racially and economically marginalized individuals are equitably distributed., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Sexual minorities-individuals who identify as gay/lesbian, bisexual, or other non-heterosexual individuals-experience higher rates of food insecurity (FI) compared to heterosexual individuals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, discrimination and structural racism, which are known risk factors for food insecurity, were perpetuated against sexual and racial/ethnic minorities. However, to our knowledge, a nationally representative analysis of the impact of the pandemic on food insecurity by sexual minority status and based on race/ethnicity is missing. We aimed to determine the degree of association between FI and sexual minority adults overall, before (2019) and during (2020-2021) the pandemic, and stratified by race/ethnicity., Methods: We used nationally representative data from the 2019-2021 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). We specified multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between FI and identifying as a sexual minority adult (≥18 years old), including gay/lesbian, bisexual, and other non-heterosexual individuals., Results: Overall, we only observed FI disparities between bisexuals and heterosexuals (aOR 1.61 [95% CI 1.31-1.99]). Stratified by year, this association was significant only during the pandemic. Stratified by race/ethnicity, non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black individuals identifying as bisexual also experienced a significantly higher FI rate than their heterosexual counterparts., Conclusion: Our results may be a manifestation of the disproportionate impact of discrimination on bisexual individuals' FI experiences. With the growing number of legislative bills targeting the rights of sexual minorities, we expect to see a higher burden of FI among bisexuals, particularly, bisexual people of color. Future intersectional research regarding FI among bisexual and racial/ethnic minority individuals would further elucidate how membership in multiple minority groups may contribute to a higher risk of FI., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Sharareh, Bybee, Goldstein, Jones, Hess, Wallace, Seligman and Wilson.)

The United States Department of Agriculture's Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) supports nutrition incentive (NI) and produce prescription programs (PPRs). PPRs allow healthcare providers to "prescribe" fruits and vegetables (FVs) to patients experiencing low income and/or chronic disease(s) and who screen positive for food insecurity. We developed a Theory of Change (TOC) that summarizes how and why PPRs work, identifies what the programs hope to achieve, and elucidates the causal pathways necessary to achieve their goals. We created the PPR TOC through an iterative, participatory process that adapted our previously developed GusNIP NI TOC. The participatory process involved food and nutrition security experts, healthcare providers, PPR implementors, and PPR evaluators reviewing the existing NI TOC and suggesting modifications to accurately reflect PPRs. The resulting TOC describes the mechanisms, assumptions, rationale, and underpinnings that lead to successful and equitable outcomes. Modifications of the NI TOC centered around equity and focused on inclusion of healthcare as an additional partner and the importance of health and healthcare utilization as outcomes. The TOC describes how the GusNIP PPR program reaches its goals. This understanding will be useful for PPR developers, implementers, funders, and evaluators for describing the pathways, assumptions, and foundations of successful PPRs.

There have been no studies comparing clinical outcomes of physiology-guided revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMD) between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG of patients with physiologically significant ULMD. From an international multicenter registry of ULMD patients interrogated with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), we analyzed data from 151 patients (85 PCI vs. 66 CABG) who underwent revascularization according to the cutoff value of iFR ≤ 0.89. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Mean age was 66.6 (± 9.2) years, 79.2% male. Mean SYNTAX score was 22.6 (± 8.4) and median iFR was 0.83 (IQR 0.74-0.87). After performing propensity score matching analysis, 48 patients treated with CABG were matched to those who underwent PCI. At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in PCI group and 20.8% in CABG group, respectively (HR 3.80; 95% CI 1.04-13.9; p = 0.043). There was no difference in each component of the primary event (p > 0.05 for all). Within the present study, iFR-guided PCI was associated with lower cardiovascular events rate in patients with ULMD and intermediate SYNTAX score, as compared to CABG. State-of-the-art PCI vs. CABG for ULMD. Study design and primary endpoint in patients with physiologically significant ULMD. MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The blue line denotes the PCI arm, and the red line denotes the CABG arm. PCI was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE than CABG. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; iFR: instantaneous wave-free ratio; MACE: major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ULMD: unprotected left main coronary artery disease., (© 2023. The Author(s).)