Who doesn't receive carotid endarterectomy when appropriate?

AbstractObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to identify clinical and nonclinical factors associated with failure to perform carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with clinically appropriate indications. We analyzed data from a prospective cohort study performed at five Veterans Affairs medical centers. Patients were referred for carotid artery evaluation if they had at least 50% stenosis in one carotid artery, had no history of CEA, and were independently classified preoperatively as appropriate candidates for CEA, according to clinical criteria. The primary outcome was receipt of CEA within 6 months of evaluation. Data were collected by medical record review and interview regarding clinical status, and patient and physician perception of the risks and benefits of CEA.ResultsAmong clinically appropriate candidates for CEA, 66.8% (n = 233) did not undergo the operation. Compared with patients who did undergo CEA, a greater proportion of these patients had no symptoms (68.7% vs 45.7%; P < .001). A twofold greater proportion of patients who did not undergo CEA were in the highest quartile of reported aversion to surgery. Moreover, a fourfold greater proportion were perceived by their physicians to be at less than 5% risk for future stroke without the operation, and more than a twofold greater proportion were believed to experience less than 5% efficacy from the operation by their providers (P < .01). In multivariable analyses, four characteristics were significantly associated with whether an appropriate candidate did not receive CEA: asymptomatic disease, less than 70% stenosis, high expressed aversion to surgery score, and low (<5%) provider-perceived efficacy of the operation.ConclusionAmong patients in the Veterans Affairs health care system who are clinically appropriate candidates for CEA, those who did not receive the operation were less likely to have symptomatic disease or high-grade carotid artery stenosis, but were more likely to report high aversion to surgery and to have a provider who believed CEA would not be efficacious

Group Versus Individual Physical Therapy for Veterans With Knee Osteoarthritis: Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND: Efficient approaches are needed for delivering nonpharmacological interventions for management of knee osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: This trial compared group-based versus individual physical therapy interventions for management of knee OA. DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred twenty patients with knee OA at the VA Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina, (mean age=60 years, 88% male, 58% nonwhite) were randomly assigned to receive either the group intervention (group physical therapy; six 1-hour sessions, typically 8 participants per group) or the individual intervention (individual physical therapy; two 1-hour sessions). Both programs included instruction in home exercise, joint protection techniques, and individual physical therapist evaluation. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC; range=0-96, higher scores indicate worse symptoms), measured at baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks. The secondary outcome measure was the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; range=0-12, higher scores indicate better performance), measured at baseline and 12 weeks. Linear mixed models assessed the difference in WOMAC scores between arms. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, WOMAC scores were 2.7 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% confidence interval [CI]-5.9, 0.5; P=.10), indicating no between-group difference. At 24 weeks, WOMAC scores were 1.3 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% CI-4.6, 2.0; P=.44), indicating no significant between-group difference. At 12 weeks, SPPB scores were 0.1 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% CI-0.5, 0.2; P=.53), indicating no difference between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted in one VA medical center. Outcome assessors were blinded, but participants and physical therapists were not blinded. CONCLUSIONS: Group physical therapy was not more effective than individual physical therapy for primary and secondary study outcomes. Either group physical therapy or individual physical therapy may be a reasonable delivery model for health care systems to consider

Study protocol: Couples Partnering for Lipid Enhancing Strategies (CouPLES) - a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Almost 50% of Americans have elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). The behaviors required to lower LDL-C levels may be difficult to adhere to if they are inconsistent with spouses' health practices, and, alternatively, may be enhanced by enlisting support from the spouse. This trial extends previous trials by requiring spouse enrollment, teaching spouses how to provide emotional and instrumental support, allowing patients to decide which component of the intervention they would like to receive, and having patients determine their own goals and action plans. Methods Veteran outpatients with above-goal LDL-C (N = 250) and their spouses are randomized, as a couple, to receive printed education materials only or the materials plus an 11-month, nurse-delivered, telephone-based intervention. The intervention contains four modules: medication adherence, diet, exercise, and patient-physician communication. Patients decide which modules they complete and in which order; modules may be repeated or omitted. Telephone calls are to patients and spouses separately and occur monthly. During each patient telephone call, patients' progress is reviewed, and patients create goals and action plans for the upcoming month. During spouse telephone calls, which occur within one week of patient calls, spouses are informed of patients' goals and action plans and devise strategies to increase emotional and instrumental support. The primary outcome is patients' LDL-C, measured at baseline, 6 months, and 11 months. Linear mixed models will be used to test the primary hypothesis that an 11-month, telephone-based patient-spouse intervention will result in a greater reduction in LDL-C as compared to printed education materials. Various process measures, including social support, self-efficacy, medication adherence, dietary behavior, and exercise, are also assessed to explain any change, or lack thereof, in LDL-C. Discussion Given the social context in which self-management occurs, interventions that teach spouses to provide instrumental and emotional support may help patients initiate and adhere to behaviors that lower their LDL-C levels. Moreover, allowing patients to retain autonomy by deciding which behaviors they would like to change and how may improve adherence and clinical outcomes. Trial Registration The ClinicalTrials.gov registration number is NCT00321789

The association of comorbid conditions with patient-reported outcomes in Veterans with hip and knee osteoarthritis

There is limited understanding of how comorbid health conditions affect osteoarthritis (OA)-related outcomes. This study examined associations of different comorbidity measures with baseline OA-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients with hip and knee OA. Data were from patients (N=300, 9 % female, mean age = 61.1; SD=9.2) enrolled in a randomized control trial at the Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Separate multivariable regression models, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics, examined the association of each comorbidity measure with baseline PROs: pain, physical function, depressive symptoms, fatigue, and insomnia. Comorbidity measures included the Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire (SACQ), conditions reported as activity-limiting (SACQ-AL), and indicators of depression, diabetes, hypertension, and back pain. Mean (SD) numbers of comorbid conditions and activity-limiting conditions were 3.4 (1.8) and 1.6 (1.4), respectively. Comorbidity scores (SACQ overall and SACQ-AL) and individual comorbidity conditions were each associated with worse OA-related PROs adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. Worse SACQ overall and SACQ-AL scores were associated with worse mean scores for pain, depressive symptoms, fatigue, and insomnia (p values <0.01). Additionally, increasing SACQ-AL scores were associated with worse mean scores for function (p<0.01). Depression was associated with worse pain (p=0.03), fatigue, and insomnia (p values <0.01). Diabetes was associated with worse fatigue (p=0.01), depressive symptoms (p=0.02), and insomnia (p=0.03). Back pain was associated with worse pain scores (p=0.02). Results provide evidence that comorbidity burden, particularly activity-limiting conditions, is associated with worse OA-related PROs. Interventions for patients with OA need to address comorbid conditions and their impact on key outcomes

A feasibility study to develop and test a Spanish patient and provider intervention for managing osteoarthritis in Hispanic/Latino adults (PRIMO-Latino)

Abstract Background Arthritis affects approximately 50 million adults in the USA. Hispanics/Latinos have a higher prevalence of arthritis-attributed activity limitations primarily related to osteoarthritis (OA). Hispanic/Latinos are less likely to receive hip replacement independent of health care access, and they are less likely to receive knee replacement. There have been few interventions to improve OA treatment among the Hispanic/Latino population in the USA. In our study, we aimed to develop and test a telephone delivered culturally appropriate Spanish behavioral intervention for the management of OA in Hispanic/Latino adults. Methods We conducted a feasibility study in an academic health center and local community in Durham, North Carolina. We enrolled self-identified Spanish speaking overweight/obese adults (≥ 18) with OA of the knee and/or hip under the care of a primary health care provider. The 12-month patient intervention focused on physical activity, weight management, and cognitive behavioral pain management skills. The patient intervention was delivered via telephone with calls scheduled twice per month for the first 6 months, then monthly for the last 6 months (18 sessions). The one-time provider intervention included delivery of patient-specific OA treatment recommendations, based on patients’ baseline data and published guidelines. The primary measures were metrics of feasibility, including recruitment and intervention delivery. We also assessed pain, stiffness, and function using the Spanish-Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Results A total of 1879 participants were identified for potential enrollment. Of those, 1864 did not meet inclusion criteria, were not able to be reached or refused. Fifteen participants enrolled in the intervention. The mean number of phone calls completed was 14.7. Eighty percent completed more than 16 calls. The mean WOMAC baseline score (SD) was 39 (20); mean improvement in WOMAC scores between baseline and 12 months, among 11 participants who completed the study, was − 13.27 [95% CI, − 25.09 to − 1.46] points. Conclusion Recruitment of Hispanics/Latinos, continues to be a major challenge. A Spanish-based telephone delivering lifestyle intervention for OA management in Hispanic/Latino adults is feasible to deliver and may lead to improved OA symptoms. Future research is needed to further test the feasibility and effectiveness of this type of intervention in this segment of the population. Trial registration NCT0178241

Organizational factors associated with readiness to implement and translate a primary care based telemedicine behavioral program to improve blood pressure control: the HTN-IMPROVE study

Abstract Background Hypertension is prevalent and often sub-optimally controlled; however, interventions to improve blood pressure control have had limited success. Objectives Through implementation of an evidence-based nurse-delivered self-management phone intervention to facilitate hypertension management within large complex health systems, we sought to answer the following questions: What is the level of organizational readiness to implement the intervention? What are the specific facilitators, barriers, and contextual factors that may affect organizational readiness to change? Study design Each intervention site from three separate Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs), which represent 21 geographic regions across the US, agreed to enroll 500 participants over a year with at least 0.5 full time equivalent employees of nursing time. Our mixed methods approach used a priori semi-structured interviews conducted with stakeholders (n = 27) including nurses, physicians, administrators, and information technology (IT) professionals between 2010 and 2011. Researchers iteratively identified facilitators and barriers of organizational readiness to change (ORC) and implementation. Additionally, an ORC survey was conducted with the stakeholders who were (n = 102) preparing for program implementation. Results Key ORC facilitators included stakeholder buy-in and improving hypertension. Positive organizational characteristics likely to impact ORC included: other similar programs that support buy-in, adequate staff, and alignment with the existing site environment; improved patient outcomes; is positive for the professional nurse role, and is evidence-based; understanding of the intervention; IT infrastructure and support, and utilization of existing equipment and space. The primary ORC barrier was unclear long-term commitment of nursing. Negative organizational characteristics likely to impact ORC included: added workload, competition with existing programs, implementation length, and limited available nurse staff time; buy-in is temporary until evidence shows improved outcomes; contacting patients and the logistics of integration into existing workflow is a challenge; and inadequate staffing is problematic. Findings were complementary across quantitative and qualitative analyses. Conclusions The model of organizational change identified key facilitators and barriers of organizational readiness to change and successful implementation. This study allows us to understand the needs and challenges of intervention implementation. Furthermore, examination of organizational facilitators and barriers to implementation of evidence-based interventions may inform dissemination in other chronic diseases.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112820/1/13012_2013_Article_683.pd

A Combined Patient and Provider Intervention for Management of Osteoarthritis in Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Management of osteoarthritis (OA) requires both medical and behavioral strategies, but there is low use of some recommended therapies