Study protocol: The Adherence and Intensification of Medications (AIM) study - a cluster randomized controlled effectiveness study

Abstract Background Many patients with diabetes have poor blood pressure (BP) control. Pharmacological therapy is the cornerstone of effective BP treatment, yet there are high rates both of poor medication adherence and failure to intensify medications. Successful medication management requires an effective partnership between providers who initiate and increase doses of effective medications and patients who adhere to the regimen. Methods In this cluster-randomized controlled effectiveness study, primary care teams within sites were randomized to a program led by a clinical pharmacist trained in motivational interviewing-based behavioral counseling approaches and authorized to make BP medication changes or to usual care. This study involved the collection of data during a 14-month intervention period in three Department of Veterans Affairs facilities and two Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities. The clinical pharmacist was supported by clinical information systems that enabled proactive identification of, and outreach to, eligible patients identified on the basis of poor BP control and either medication refill gaps or lack of recent medication intensification. The primary outcome is the relative change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) measurements over time. Secondary outcomes are changes in Hemoglobin A1c, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), medication adherence determined from pharmacy refill data, and medication intensification rates. Discussion Integration of the three intervention elements - proactive identification, adherence counseling and medication intensification - is essential to achieve optimal levels of control for high-risk patients. Testing the effectiveness of this intervention at the team level allows us to study the program as it would typically be implemented within a clinic setting, including how it integrates with other elements of care. Trial Registration The ClinicalTrials.gov registration number is NCT00495794.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78258/1/1745-6215-11-95.xmlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78258/2/1745-6215-11-95.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78258/3/1745-6215-11-95-S1.DOCPeer Reviewe

Complex Care Management Program Overview

This report includes brief updates on various forms of complex care management including: Aetna - Medicare Advantage Embedded Case Management ProgramBrigham and Women's Hospital - Care Management ProgramIndependent Health - Care PartnersIntermountain Healthcare and Oregon Health and Science University - Care Management PlusJohns Hopkins University - Hospital at HomeMount Sinai Medical Center -- New York - Mount Sinai Visiting Doctors Program/ Chelsea-Village House Calls ProgramsPartners in Care Foundation - HomeMeds ProgramPrinceton HealthCare System - Partnerships for PIECEQuality Improvement for Complex Chronic Conditions - CarePartner ProgramSenior Services - Project Enhance/EnhanceWellnessSenior Whole Health - Complex Care Management ProgramSumma Health/Ohio Department of Aging - PASSPORT Medicaid Waiver ProgramSutter Health - Sutter Care Coordination ProgramUniversity of Washington School of Medicine - TEAMcar

Patient Engagement Interventions to Enhance Medication Safety in Long-Term Care: A Systematic Review

The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effectiveness of patient engagement interventions tested in randomized controlled trials (RCT) to enhance medication safety in long-term care. Searches for relevant studies were conducted in the databases Medline, CINAHL, and CENTRAL, and RCTs published between January 2011 and December 2021 that tested patient engagement interventions in long-term care, and measured medication safety. Eligibility and quality were determined independently by two researchers, and effects on medication safety were analysed descriptively. Out of 850 screened records, five studies reporting patient engagement interventions were included and classified as involvement (n = 3) and partnership/shared leadership (n = 2). The studies were heterogeneous regarding sample size, patient characteristics and outcome measures, and all had methodological quality limitations. The interventions were complex with multiple components. Three RCTs reported statistically significant effects of patient engagement interventions on medication safety, when compared to control arms. In conclusion, the limited body of evidence suggests that engaging patients in their own medication care may improve medication safety. Future research is needed to guide the practice field and stakeholders, and should include effect studies with a high degree of patient engagement. The research community should find consensus in medication safety outcome measurements.Patient Engagement Interventions to Enhance Medication Safety in Long-Term Care: A Systematic ReviewpublishedVersio

Desarrollo de una taxonomía de las intervenciones farmacéuticas en pacientes VIH+ basados en el modelo CMO

Objective: To agree on a proposal for pharmaceutical interventions and establish their classification taxonomy according to the CMO-Pharmaceutical Care Model (Capacity-Motivation- Opportunity). Method: A study conducted between March and May, 2016. Two phases of development were defined. A literature review was initially conducted. Then, the DELPHI-Rand-UCLA methodology was used in order to reach a consensus about those interventions selected, and to define the taxonomy. Fifteen (15) experts, specialists in Pharmaceutical Care for HIV+ patients, were selected. This selection was explicitly conducted, following a protocol in order to avoid any bias. An initial proposal was developed according to the interventions extracted from Phase 1. These were tentatively classified according to the CMO Model, in a category based on their design and utility. Three issues were raised from the initial question: Do you agree with the proposed classification? If not, there was an option to re-categorize. Additionally, they were asked about the importance, priority and impact to achieve pharmacotherapeutic objectives that they would assign to it. Interventions were classified according to the degree of agreement. Once a consensus was reached, the final taxonomy was established. Results: Eighteen (18) articles were finally considered. The initial proposal included 20 pharmaceutical interventions with the following classification: seven in Capacity, eight in Motivation, and five in Opportunity. Those interventions considered to have greater importance and priority were: Review and Validation, Safety, and Adherence. The interventions with the greatest impact were: Review and Validation, Coordination, Adherence, and Motivation. On the other hand, the lowest scores for importance were for: Planning and Social Coordination; and in terms of impact: Social Coordination. Conclusions: The taxonomy reached by consensus will allow to classify pharmaceutical interventions with the new model, and therefore to conduct an improved research and patient care

Teaching students to teach patients: A theory-guided approach

Nurses in every setting provide patient teaching on a routine basis, often several times a day. Patient teaching skills are essential competencies to be developed during pre-licensure nursing education. While students learn what to teach for specific conditions, they often lack competence in how to teach in ways that individualize and optimize patient learning. The ultimate goal of patient teaching is to arm patients with the knowledge and skills, and the desire and confidence in their ability to reach their targeted health outcomes. We describe the creation of a theoretical framework to guide development of patient teaching skills. The framework, rooted in the contemporary health care values of patient-centered care, is a synthesis of four evidence-based approaches to patient teaching: patient engagement, motivational interviewing, adult learning theory, and teach-back method. Specific patient teaching skills, derived from each of the approaches, are applied within the context of discharge teaching, an important nursing practice linked to patient outcomes. This exemplar emphasizes the use of critical teaching process skills and targeted informational content. An online student learning module based on the theoretical framework and combined with simulation experiences provides the nurse educator with one strategy for use with nursing students. The theoretical framework has applicability for skill development during pre-licensure education and skill refinement for nurses in clinical practice

Engaging family supporters of adult patients with diabetes to improve clinical and patient-centered outcomes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Most adults with diabetes who are at high risk for complications have family or friends who are involved in their medical and self-care (“family supporters”). These family supporters are an important resource who could be leveraged to improve patients’ engagement in their care and patient health outcomes. However, healthcare teams lack structured and feasible approaches to effectively engage family supporters in patient self-management support. This trial tests a strategy to strengthen the capacity of family supporters to help adults with high-risk diabetes engage in healthcare, successfully enact care plans, and lower risk of diabetes complications. Methods/design We will conduct a randomized trial evaluating the CO-IMPACT (Caring Others Increasing EnageMent in Patient Aligned Care Teams) intervention. Two hunded forty adults with diabetes who are at high risk for diabetes complications due to poor glycemic control or high blood pressure will be randomized, along with a family supporter (living either with the patient or remotely), to CO-IMPACT or enhanced usual primary care for 12 months. CO-IMPACT provides patient-supporter dyads: it provides one coaching session addressing supporter techniques for helping patients with behavior change motivation, action planning, and proactive communication with healthcare providers; biweekly automated phone calls to prompt dyad action on new patient health concerns; phone calls to prompt preparation for patients’ primary care visits; and primary care visit summaries sent to both patient and supporter. Primary outcomes are changes in patient activation, as measured by the Patient Activation Measure-13, and change in 5-year cardiac event risk, as measured by the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study cardiac risk score for people with diabetes. Secondary outcomes include patients’ diabetes self-management behaviors, diabetes distress, and glycemic and blood pressure control. Measures among supporters will include use of effective support techniques, burden, and distress about patient’s diabetes care. Discussion If effective in improving patient activation and diabetes management, CO-IMPACT will provide healthcare teams with evidence-based tools and techniques to engage patients’ available family or friends in supporting patient self-management, even if they live remotely. The core skills addressed by CO-IMPACT can be used by patients and their supporters over time to respond to changing patient health needs and priorities. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02328326 . Registered on 31 December 2014.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145179/1/13063_2018_Article_2785.pd

eHealth for Patient Engagement: a systematic review

eHealth interventions are recognized to have a tremendous potential to promote patient engagement. To date, the majority of studies examine the efficacy of eHealth in enhancing clinical outcomes without focusing on patient engagement in its specificity. This paper aimed at reviewing findings from the literature about the use of eHealth in engaging patients in their own care process. We undertook a comprehensive literature search within the peer-reviewed international literature. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. eHealth interventions reviewed were mainly devoted to foster only partial dimensions of patient engagement (i.e. alternatively cognitive, emotional or behavioral domains related to healthcare management), thus failing to consider the complexity of such an experience. This also led to a great heterogeneity of technologies, assessed variables and achieved outcomes. This systematic review underlines the need for a more holistic view of patient needs to actually engage them in Ehealth interventions and obtaining positive outcomes. In this sense, patient engagement constitute a new frontiers for healthcare models where eHealth could maximize its potentialities

Impact of providing patients access to electronic health records on quality and safety of care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of sharing electronic health records (EHRs) with patients and map it across six domains of quality of care (ie, patient-centredness, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, equity and safety). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, HMIC, Medline/PubMed and PsycINFO, from 1997 to 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised trials focusing on adult subjects, testing an intervention consisting of sharing EHRs with patients, and with an outcome in one of the six domains of quality of care. DATA ANALYSIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Title and abstract screening were performed by two pairs of investigators and assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. For each domain, a narrative synthesis of the results was performed, and significant differences in results between low risk and high/unclear risk of bias studies were tested (t-test, p<0.05). Continuous outcomes evaluated in four studies or more (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)) were pooled as weighted mean difference (WMD) using random effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were performed for low risk of bias studies, and long-term interventions only (lasting more than 12 months). RESULTS: Twenty studies were included (17 387 participants). The domain most frequently assessed was effectiveness (n=14), and the least were timeliness and equity (n=0). Inconsistent results were found for patient-centredness outcomes (ie, satisfaction, activation, self-efficacy, empowerment or health literacy), with 54.5% of the studies (n=6) demonstrating a beneficial effect. Meta-analyses showed a beneficial effect in effectiveness by reducing absolute values of HbA1c (unit: %; WMD=-0.316; 95% CI -0.540 to -0.093, p=0.005, I 2=0%), which remained significant in the sensitivity analyses for low risk of bias studies (WMD= -0.405; 95% CI -0.711 to -0.099), and long-term interventions only (WMD=-0.272; 95% CI -0.482 to -0.062). A significant reduction of absolute values of SBP (unit: mm Hg) was found but lost in sensitivity analysis for studies with low risk of bias (WMD= -1.375; 95% CI -2.791 to 0.041). No significant effect was found for DBP (unit: mm Hg; WMD=-0.918; 95% CI -2.078 to 0.242, p=0.121, I 2=0%). Concerning efficiency, most studies (80%, n=4) found either a reduction of healthcare usage or no change. A beneficial effect was observed in a range of safety outcomes (ie, general adherence, medication safety), but not in medication adherence. The proportion of studies reporting a beneficial effect did not differ between low risk and high/unclear risk studies, for the domains evaluated. DISCUSSION: Our analysis supports that sharing EHRs with patients is effective in reducing HbA1c levels, a major predictor of mortality in type 2 diabetes (mean decrease of -0.405, unit: %) and could improve patient safety. More studies are necessary to enhance meta-analytical power and assess the impact in other domains of care. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO (CRD42017070092)