Integrating health services into intimate partner violence and sexual violence programs

Public Health Significance: Approximately one in four woman will experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in her lifetime. Reproductive Coercion (RC), a form of IPV, has a 9% lifetime prevalence, the likelihood of which significantly increases when a woman is already experiencing IPV. RC is linked to outcomes such as unintended pregnancy, emergency contraception use, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and late or multiple abortions due to a partner’s controlling behavior. Given the complexities and often recent nature of abuse that women seeking help have experienced, time sensitive health services must be accessible and immediately available in order to prevent STIs, HIV, unwanted pregnancy, and permanent injury; however studies to date have not identified how to appropriately implement these urgent health services. This project evaluated a training aimed at integrating health services into IPV programming and identified barriers faced in implementing the integrating of health services into IPV/Sexual Violence (SV) programs. This training was completed as one aim of Project Connect, a national violence-prevention initiative developed to provide a more effective health care response to IPV/SV through bridging Public Health and IPV/SV agency partnerships Methods: IPV/SV advocates received a training on integrating health services into their agencies and completed a pre- and six month post-test to assess confidence, attitude, and behavior change. Semi-structured phone interviews from advocate and public health Project Connect site leads were examined for barriers to integration. Results: Survey results showed IPV/SV advocates were more likely to make a connection between IPV/RC and health, and more likely to provide woman seeking services with health services or health resources after receiving this training. Themes from coding interviews indicated clinical providers and advocates value warm referrals, partnerships and knowledge gained about RC. Interviews also revealed barriers including logistics to implementing health services, cultural differences in institutions, and difficulty creating partnerships. Conclusions: Trainings aimed at advocates integrating basic health services into their work may be one effective way to enable women experiencing violence to get these time sensitive health needs addressed. However, training alone cannot create needed partnerships with public health or family planning clinics, which is imperative to providing woman services

Perceived physical fatigability predicts all-cause mortality in older adults

BACKGROUND: Perceived physical fatigability is highly prevalent in older adults and associated with mobility decline and other health consequences. We examined the prognostic value of perceived physical fatigability as an independent predictor of risk of death among older adults. METHODS: Participants (N = 2 906), mean age 73.5 [SD, 10.4] years, 54.2% women, 99.7% white enrolled in the Long Life Family Study, were assessed at Visit 2 (2014-2017) with 2.7 [SD, 1.0] years follow-up. The Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale (PFS), a 10-item, self-administered validated questionnaire (score range 0-50, higher = greater fatigability) measured perceived physical fatigability at Visit 2. Deaths post-Visit 2 through December 31, 2019 were identified by family members notifying field centers, reporting during another family member\u27s annual phone follow-up, an obituary, or Civil Registration System (Denmark). We censored all other participants at their last contact. Cox proportional hazard models predicted mortality by fatigability severity, adjusted for family relatedness and other covariates. RESULTS: Age-adjusted PFS Physical scores were higher for those who died (19.1 [SE, 0.8]) compared with alive (12.2, [SE, 0.4]) overall, as well as across age strata (p \u3c .001), except for those 60-69 years (p = .79). Participants with the most severe fatigability (PFS Physical scores ≥ 25) were over twice as likely to die (hazard ratio, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.65-3.28]) compared with those who had less severe fatigability (PFS Physical scores \u3c 25) after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Our work underscores the utility of the PFS as a novel patient-reported prognostic indicator of phenotypic aging that captures both overt and underlying disease burden that predicts death

Hearing treatment for reducing cognitive decline: Design and methods of the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders randomized controlled trial

IntroductionHearing impairment is highly prevalent and independently associated with cognitive decline. The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial to determine efficacy of hearing treatment in reducing cognitive decline in older adults. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03243422.MethodsEight hundred fifty participants without dementia aged 70 to 84 years with mild-to-moderate hearing impairment recruited from four United States field sites and randomized 1:1 to a best-practices hearing intervention or health education control. Primary study outcome is 3-year change in global cognitive function. Secondary outcomes include domain-specific cognitive decline, incident dementia, brain structural changes on magnetic resonance imaging, health-related quality of life, physical and social function, and physical activity.ResultsTrial enrollment began January 4, 2018 and is ongoing.DiscussionWhen completed in 2022, Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders study should provide definitive evidence of the effect of hearing treatment versus education control on cognitive decline in community-dwelling older adults with mild-to-moderate hearing impairment

Recruitment and baseline data of the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study: A randomized trial of a hearing loss intervention for reducing cognitive decline

INTRODUCTIONHearing loss is highly prevalent among older adults and independently associated with cognitive decline. The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study is a multicenter randomized control trial (partially nested within the infrastructure of an observational cohort study, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities [ARIC] study) to determine the efficacy of best-practice hearing treatment to reduce cognitive decline over 3 years. The goal of this paper is to describe the recruitment process and baseline results.METHODSMultiple strategies were used to recruit community-dwelling 70–84-year-old participants with adult-onset hearing loss who were free of substantial cognitive impairment from the parent ARIC study and de novo from the surrounding communities into the trial. Participants completed telephone screening, an in-person hearing, vision, and cognitive screening, and a comprehensive hearing assessment to determine eligibility.RESULTSOver a 24-month period, 3004 telephone screenings resulted in 2344 in-person hearing, vision, and cognition screenings and 1294 comprehensive hearing screenings. Among 1102 eligible, 977 were randomized into the trial (median age = 76.4 years; 53.5% female; 87.8% White; 53.3% held a Bachelor's degree or higher). Participants recruited through the ARIC study were recruited much earlier and were less likely to report hearing loss interfered with their quality of life relative to participants recruited de novo from the community. Minor differences in baseline hearing or health characteristics were found by recruitment route (i.e., ARIC study or de novo) and by study site.DISCUSSIONThe ACHIEVE study successfully completed enrollment over 2 years that met originally projected rates of recruitment. Substantial operational and scientific efficiencies during study startup were achieved through embedding this trial within the infrastructure of a longstanding and well-established observational study.HighlightsThe ACHIEVE study tests the effect of hearing intervention on cognitive decline.The study is partially nested within an existing cohort study.Over 2 years, 977 participants recruited and enrolled.Eligibility assessed by telephone and in-person for hearing, vision, and cognitive screening.The ACHIEVE study findings will have significant public health implications

Relationship Between Personality Measures and Perceived Mental Fatigability.

OBJECTIVE: Examine the association between personality measures and perceived mental fatigability. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis in N=1670 men, age 84.3±4.1 years. Multivariable linear regression models were used to examine the covariate adjusted association between personality measures (conscientiousness, optimism, goal reengagement, and goal disengagement) and perceived mental fatigability (measured with the validated 10-item Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale, PFS). RESULTS: One standard deviation lower conscientiousness (β=-0.91, p<.0001) and optimism (β=-0.63, p<.0001), and higher goal reengagement (β=0.51, p=.01) scores were independently associated with higher PFS Mental scores adjusted for age, cognitive function, self-reported health status, depressive symptoms, sleep disturbance, physical activity, and goal disengagement. DISCUSSION: Lower conscientiousness, optimism, and higher goal reengagement were linked with more severe perceived mental fatigability in older men. Personality traits may potentially contribute to early risk assessment for fatigability in later life. Future work should be longitudinal in nature and include personality assessments to confirm the temporality of the relationships observed

Alcohol treatment discussions and clinical outcomes among patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis

Abstract Background Alcohol cessation is the cornerstone of treatment for alcohol-related cirrhosis. This study evaluated associations between medical conversations about alcohol use disorder (AUD) treatment, AUD treatment engagement, and mortality. Methods This retrospective cohort study included all patients with ICD-10 diagnosis codes for cirrhosis and AUD who were engaged in hepatology care in a single healthcare system in 2015. Baseline demographic, medical, liver disease, and AUD treatment data were assessed. AUD treatment discussions and initiation, alcohol cessation, and subsequent 5-year mortality were collected. Multivariable models were used to assess the factors associated with subsequent AUD treatment and 5-year mortality. Results Among 436 patients with cirrhosis due to alcohol, 65 patients (15%) received AUD treatment at baseline, including 48 (11%) receiving behavioral therapy alone, 11 (2%) receiving pharmacotherapy alone, and 6 (1%) receiving both. Over the first year after a baseline hepatology visit, 37 patients engaged in AUD treatment, 51 were retained in treatment, and 14 stopped treatment. Thirty percent of patients had hepatology-documented AUD treatment recommendations and 26% had primary care-documented AUD treatment recommendations. Most hepatology (86%) and primary care (88%) recommendations discussed behavioral therapy alone. Among patients with ongoing alcohol use at baseline, AUD treatment one year later was significantly, independently associated with AUD treatment discussions with hepatology (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.58, 6.89) or primary care (aOR: 2.95; 95% CI: 1.44, 6.15) and negatively associated with having Medicaid insurance (aOR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.93). When treatment was discussed in both settings, high rates of treatment ensued (aOR: 10.72, 95% CI: 3.89, 33.52). Over a 5-year follow-up period, 152 (35%) patients died. Ongoing alcohol use, age, hepatic decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma were significantly associated with mortality in the final survival model. Conclusion AUD treatment discussions were documented in less than half of hepatology and primary care encounters in patients with alcohol-related cirrhosis, though such discussions were significantly associated with receipt of AUD treatment

Depression and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Older Adults With Hearing Loss in the ACHIEVE Study

Hearing loss is associated with cognitive/physical health; less is known about mental health. We investigated associations between hearing loss severity, depression, and health-related quality of life among older adults with unaided hearing loss. Data (N = 948) were from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Study. Hearing was measured by pure-tone average (PTA), Quick Speech-in-Noise (QuickSIN) test, and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE-S). Outcomes were validated measures of depression and health-related quality of life. Associations were assessed by negative binomial regression. More severe hearing loss was associated with worse physical health–related quality of life (ratio: .98, 95% CI: .96, 1.00). Better QuickSIN was associated with higher mental health–related quality of life (1.01 [1.00, 1.02]). Worse HHIE-S was associated with depression (1.24 [1.16, 1.33]) and worse mental (.97 [.96, .98]) and physical (.95 [ .93, .96]) health–related quality of life. Further work will test effects of hearing intervention on mental health

Loneliness and Social Network Characteristics Among Older Adults with Hearing Loss in the ACHIEVE Study

Background: Hearing loss is linked to loneliness and social isolation, but evidence is typically based on self-reported hearing. This study quantifies the associations of objective and subjective hearing loss with loneliness and social network characteristics among older adults with untreated hearing loss. Methods: This study uses baseline data (N=933) from The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) study. Hearing loss was quantified by the better ear, speech-frequency pure tone average (PTA), Quick Speech-in-Noise test, and hearing related quality of life. Outcomes were validated measures of loneliness and social network characteristics. Associations wereassessed by Poisson, negative binomial, and linear regression adjusted for demographic, health, and study design characteristics. Results: Participants were mean of 76.8 (4.0) years, 54.0% female, and 87.6% White. Prevalence of loneliness was 38%. Worse PTA was associated with 19% greater prevalence of moderate or greater loneliness (PR: 1.19.95% CI: 1.06, 1.33). Better speech-in-noise recognition was associated with greater social network characteristics (e.g., larger social network size [IRR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.07]). Worse hearing related quality of life was associated with 29% greater prevalence of moderate or greater loneliness (PR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.19, 1.39) and worse social network characteristics (e.g., more constricted social network size [IRR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.91, 1.00]). Conclusion: Results suggest the importance of multiple dimensions of hearing to loneliness and social connectedness. Hearing related quality of life may be a potentially useful, easily administered clinical tool for identifying older adults with hearing loss associated with greater loneliness and social isolation

Hearing intervention versus health education control to reduce cognitive decline in older adults with hearing loss in the USA (ACHIEVE): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BackgroundHearing loss is associated with increased cognitive decline and incident dementia in older adults. We aimed to investigate whether a hearing intervention could reduce cognitive decline in cognitively healthy older adults with hearing loss.MethodsThe ACHIEVE study is a multicentre, parallel-group, unmasked, randomised controlled trial of adults aged 70–84 years with untreated hearing loss and without substantial cognitive impairment that took place at four community study sites across the USA. Participants were recruited from two study populations at each site: (1) older adults participating in a long-standing observational study of cardiovascular health (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities [ARIC] study), and (2) healthy de novo community volunteers. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a hearing intervention (audiological counselling and provision of hearing aids) or a control intervention of health education (individual sessions with a health educator covering topics on chronic disease prevention) and followed up every 6 months. The primary endpoint was 3-year change in a global cognition standardised factor score from a comprehensive neurocognitive battery. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03243422.FindingsFrom Nov 9, 2017, to Oct 25, 2019, we screened 3004 participants for eligibility and randomly assigned 977 (32·5%; 238 [24%] from ARIC and 739 [76%] de novo). We randomly assigned 490 (50%) to the hearing intervention and 487 (50%) to the health education control. The cohort had a mean age of 76·8 years (SD 4·0), 523 (54%) were female, 454 (46%) were male, and most were White (n=858 [88%]). Participants from ARIC were older, had more risk factors for cognitive decline, and had lower baseline cognitive scores than those in the de novo cohort. In the primary analysis combining the ARIC and de novo cohorts, 3-year cognitive change (in SD units) was not significantly different between the hearing intervention and health education control groups (–0·200 [95% CI –0·256 to –0·144] in the hearing intervention group and –0·202 [–0·258 to –0·145] in the control group; difference 0·002 [–0·077 to 0·081]; p=0·96). However, a prespecified sensitivity analysis showed a significant difference in the effect of the hearing intervention on 3-year cognitive change between the ARIC and de novo cohorts (pinteraction=0·010). Other prespecified sensitivity analyses that varied analytical parameters used in the total cohort did not change the observed results. No significant adverse events attributed to the study were reported with either the hearing intervention or health education control.InterpretationThe hearing intervention did not reduce 3-year cognitive decline in the primary analysis of the total cohort. However, a prespecified sensitivity analysis showed that the effect differed between the two study populations that comprised the cohort. These findings suggest that a hearing intervention might reduce cognitive change over 3 years in populations of older adults at increased risk for cognitive decline but not in populations at decreased risk for cognitive decline