Improved delivery of cardiovascular care (IDOCC) through outreach facilitation: study protocol and implementation details of a cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care

Abstract Background There is a need to find innovative approaches for translating best practices for chronic disease care into daily primary care practice routines. Primary care plays a crucial role in the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease. There is, however, a substantive care gap, and many challenges exist in implementing evidence-based care. The Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project is a pragmatic trial designed to improve the delivery of evidence-based care for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in primary care practices using practice outreach facilitation. Methods The IDOCC project is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized control trial in which Practice Outreach Facilitators work with primary care practices to improve cardiovascular disease prevention and management for patients at highest risk. Primary care practices in a large health region in Eastern Ontario, Canada, were eligible to participate. The intervention consists of regular monthly meetings with the Practice Outreach Facilitator over a one- to two-year period. Starting with audit and feedback, consensus building, and goal setting, the practices are supported in changing practice behavior by incorporating chronic care model elements. These elements include (a) evidence-based decision support for providers, (b) delivery system redesign for practices, (c) enhanced self-management support tools provided to practices to help them engage patients, and (d) increased community resource linkages for practices to enhance referral of patients. The primary outcome is a composite score measured at the level of the patient to represent each practice's adherence to evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular care. Qualitative analysis of the Practice Outreach Facilitators' written narratives of their ongoing practice interactions will be done. These textual analyses will add further insight into understanding critical factors impacting project implementation. Discussion This pragmatic, stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial with both quantitative and process evaluations demonstrates innovative methods of implementing large-scale quality improvement and evidence-based approaches to care delivery. This is the first Canadian study to examine the impact of a large-scale multifaceted cardiovascular quality-improvement program in primary care. It is anticipated that through the evaluation of IDOCC, we will demonstrate an effective, practical, and sustainable means of improving the cardiovascular health of patients across Canada. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0057480

Geographic and facility variation in initial use of non-tunneled catheters for incident maintenance hemodialysis patients

Abstract Background Non-tunneled (temporary) hemodialysis catheters (NTHCs) are the least-optimal initial vascular access for incident maintenance hemodialysis patients yet little is known about factors associated with NTHC use in this context. We sought to determine factors associated with NTHC use and examine regional and facility-level variation in NTHC use for incident maintenance hemodialysis patients. Methods We analyzed registry data collected between January 2001 and December 2010 from 61 dialysis facilities within 12 geographic regions in Canada. Multi-level models and intra-class correlation coefficients were used to evaluate variation in NTHC use as initial hemodialysis access across facilities and geographic regions. Facility and patient characteristics associated with the lowest and highest quartiles of NTHC use were compared. Results During the study period, 21,052 patients initiated maintenance hemodialysis using a central venous catheter (CVC). This included 10,183 patients (48.3 %) in whom the initial CVC was a NTHC, as opposed to a tunneled CVC. Crude variation in NTHC use across facilities ranged from 3.7 to 99.4 % and across geographic regions from 32.4 to 85.1 %. In an adjusted multi-level logistic regression model, the proportion of total variation in NTHC use explained by facility-level and regional variation was 40.0 % and 34.1 %, respectively. Similar results were observed for the subgroup of patients who received greater than 12 months of pre-dialysis nephrology care. Patient-level factors associated with increased NTHC use were male gender, history of angina, pulmonary edema, COPD, hypertension, increasing distance from dialysis facility, higher serum phosphate, lower serum albumin and later calendar year. Conclusions There is wide variation in NTHC use as initial vascular access for incident maintenance hemodialysis patients across facilities and geographic regions in Canada. Identifying modifiable factors that explain this variation could facilitate a reduction of NTHC use in favor of more optimal initial vascular access

Erratum: Oral salt and water versus intravenous saline for the prevention of acute kidney injury following contrast-enhanced computed tomography: study protocol for a pilot randomized trial Salmonella blood stream infections in a tertiary care setting in Ghana.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s40697-015-0048-7.]

Serum BTP concentrations are not affected by hepatic dysfunction

Abstract Background Beta Trace Protein (BTP) is a promising marker of glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Equations to estimate GFR using BTP have been proposed. Very little is known about BTP’s production and metabolism. It has been hypothesized that the liver metabolizes certain BTP isoforms. As such, hepatic dysfunction may influence serum levels independently of GFR. This would impact on the accuracy and precision of GFR estimates using BTP. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of cirrhosis on serum BTP concentrations. Methods BTP, cystatin C (cysC) and creatinine (Cr) were measured in 99 cirrhotic subjects and in matched controls. BTP/cysC and Cr/cysC ratios were compared between cases and controls. This was repeated after stratification by Child Pugh category. Comparisons of ratios between Child Pugh category A and combined B and C case subjects were also performed. Results There were no differences in BTP/cysC ratios between cases and controls for the entire cohort (0.80 vs 0.79) or for any of the Child Pugh categories (p > 0.10). There were significant differences between cases (1.09) and controls (0.73) for the BTP/Cr ratios (p < 0.001). The BTP/Cr ratio was higher in those with more advanced cirrhosis as compared to those with less severe cirrhosis (1.20 vs 1.03, p < 0.01). There were no differences in BTP/cysC ratios between those with less severe and more advanced cirrhosis (p = 0.25). Conclusions This study suggests that hepatic dysfunction does not influence serum BTP levels and argues against a significant role for the liver in BTP metabolism. Confirmation in a larger group of patients with advanced cirrhosis is required

Prevention of Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury: Is Simple Oral Hydration Similar To Intravenous? A Systematic Review of the Evidence

Background: Pre-procedural intravenous fluid administration is an effective prophylaxis measure for contrast-induced acute kidney injury. For logistical ease, the oral route is an alternative to the intravenous. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of the oral to the intravenous route in prevention of contrast-induced acute kidney injury. Study Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials with a stratified analysis and metaregression. Databases included MEDLINE (1950 to November 23 2011), EMBASE (1947 to week 47 2011), Cochrane CENTRAL (3rd quarter 2011). Two reviewers identified relevant trials and abstracted data. Settings and Population: Trials including patients undergoing a contrast enhanced procedure. Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trial; adult (.18 years) population; comparison of oral versus intravenous volume expansion. Intervention: Oral route of volume expansion compared to the intravenous route. Outcomes: Any measure of acute kidney injury, need for renal replacement therapy, hospitalization and death. Results: Six trials including 513 patients met inclusion criteria. The summary odds ratio was 1.19 (95% CI 0.46, 3.10, p = 0.73) suggesting no difference between the two routes of volume expansion. There was significant heterogeneity (Cochran’s Q= 11.65, p = 0.04; I2 = 57). In the stratified analysis, inclusion of the five studies with a prespecified oral volume expansion protocol resulted in a shift towards oral volume expansion (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.37, 1.50, p = 0.42) and also resolved the heterogeneity (Q = 3.19, P = 0.53; I2 = 0). Limitations: Small number of studies identified; lack of hard clinical outcomes. Conclusion: The oral route may be as effective as the intravenous route for volume expansion for contrast-induced acute kidney injury prevention. Adequately powered trials with hard endpoints should be done given the potential advantages of oral (e.g. reduced patient burden and cost) over intravenous volume expansion