A primary healthcare information intervention for communicating cardiovascular risk to patients with poorly controlled hypertension: The Education and Coronary Risk Evaluation (Educore) study-A pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial

PURPOSE: Uncertainty exists regarding the best way to communicate cardiovascular risk (CVR) to patients, and it is unclear whether the comprehension and perception of CVR varies according to the format used. The aim of the present work was to determine whether a strategy designed for communicating CVR information to patients with poorly controlled high blood pressure (HBP), but with no background of cardiovascular disease, was more effective than usual care in the control of blood pressure (BP) over the course of a year. METHODS: A pragmatic, two-arm, cluster-randomized controlled trial was performed. Consecutive patients aged 40-65 years, all diagnosed with HBP in the last 12 months, and all of whom showed poor control of their condition (systolic BP ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg), were recruited at 22 primary healthcare centres. Eleven centres were randomly assigned to the usual care arm, and 11 to the informative intervention arm (Educore arm). At the start of the study, the Educore arm subjects were shown the "low risk SCORE table", along with impacting images and information pamphlets encouraging the maintenance of good cardiovascular health. The main outcome variable measured was the control of HBP; the secondary outcome variables were SCORE table score, total plasma cholesterol concentration, use of tobacco, adherence to prescribed treatment, and quality of life. RESULTS: The study participants were 411 patients (185 in the Educore arm and 226 in the usual care arm). Multilevel logistic regression showed that, at 12 months, the Educore intervention achieved better control of HBP (OR = 1.57; 1.02 to 2.41). No statistically significant differences were seen between the two arms at 12 months with respect to the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, the Educore intervention was associated with better control of HBP after adjusting for age, baseline SBP and plasma cholesterol, at 12 months.This study was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation via the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Subprograma de Proyectos de Investigación en Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias y Servicios de Salud (PI 09/90354), and the Fundación de Investigación e Innovación Biomédica en Atención Primaria (FIIBAP). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscriptS

Effectiveness of a strategy that uses educational games to implement clinical practice guidelines among Spanish residents of family and community medicine (e-EDUCAGUIA project):A clinical trial by clusters

This study was funded by the Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias FIS Grant Number PI11/0477 ISCIII.-REDISSEC Proyecto RD12/0001/0012 AND FEDER Funding.Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed with the aim of helping health professionals, patients, and caregivers make decisions about their health care, using the best available evidence. In many cases, incorporation of these recommendations into clinical practice also implies a need for changes in routine clinical practice. Using educational games as a strategy for implementing recommendations among health professionals has been demonstrated to be effective in some studies; however, evidence is still scarce. The primary objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of a teaching strategy for the implementation of CPGs using educational games (e-learning EDUCAGUIA) to improve knowledge and skills related to clinical decision-making by residents in family medicine. The primary objective will be evaluated at 1 and 6months after the intervention. The secondary objectives are to identify barriers and facilitators for the use of guidelines by residents of family medicine and to describe the educational strategies used by Spanish teaching units of family and community medicine to encourage implementation of CPGs. Methods/design: We propose a multicenter clinical trial with randomized allocation by clusters of family and community medicine teaching units in Spain. The sample size will be 394 residents (197 in each group), with the teaching units as the randomization unit and the residents comprising the analysis unit. For the intervention, both groups will receive an initial 1-h session on clinical practice guideline use and the usual dissemination strategy by e-mail. The intervention group (e-learning EDUCAGUIA) strategy will consist of educational games with hypothetical clinical scenarios in a virtual environment. The primary outcome will be the score obtained by the residents on evaluation questionnaires for each clinical practice guideline. Other included variables will be the sociodemographic and training variables of the residents and the teaching unit characteristics. The statistical analysis will consist of a descriptive analysis of variables and a baseline comparison of both groups. For the primary outcome analysis, an average score comparison of hypothetical scenario questionnaires between the EDUCAGUIA intervention group and the control group will be performed at 1 and 6months post-intervention, using 95% confidence intervals. A linear multilevel regression will be used to adjust the model. Discussion: The identification of effective teaching strategies will facilitate the incorporation of available knowledge into clinical practice that could eventually improve patient outcomes. The inclusion of information technologies as teaching tools permits greater learning autonomy and allows deeper instructor participation in the monitoring and supervision of residents. The long-term impact of this strategy is unknown; however, because it is aimed at professionals undergoing training and it addresses prevalent health problems, a small effect can be of great relevance. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02210442.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

EDUCORE project: a clinical trial, randomised by clusters, to assess the effect of a visual learning method on blood pressure control in the primary healthcare setting

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>High blood pressure (HBP) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). European hypertension and cardiology societies as well as expert committees on CVD prevention recommend stratifying cardiovascular risk using the SCORE method, the modification of lifestyles to prevent CVD, and achieving good control over risk factors. The EDUCORE (Education and Coronary Risk Evaluation) project aims to determine whether the use of a cardiovascular risk visual learning method - the EDUCORE method - is more effective than normal clinical practice in improving the control of blood pressure within one year in patients with poorly controlled hypertension but no background of CVD;</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This work describes a protocol for a clinical trial, randomised by clusters and involving 22 primary healthcare clinics, to test the effectiveness of the EDUCORE method. The number of patients required was 736, all between 40 and 65 years of age (n = 368 in the EDUCORE and control groups), all of whom had been diagnosed with HBP at least one year ago, and all of whom had poorly controlled hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 90 mmHg). All personnel taking part were explained the trial and trained in its methodology. The EDUCORE method contemplates the visualisation of low risk SCORE scores using images embodying different stages of a high risk action, plus the receipt of a pamphlet explaining how to better maintain cardiac health. The main outcome variable was the control of blood pressure; secondary outcome variables included the SCORE score, therapeutic compliance, quality of life, and total cholesterol level. All outcome variables were measured at the beginning of the experimental period and again at 6 and 12 months. Information on sex, age, educational level, physical activity, body mass index, consumption of medications, change of treatment and blood analysis results was also recorded;</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The EDUCORE method could provide a simple, inexpensive means of improving blood pressure control, and perhaps other health problems, in the primary healthcare setting;</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01155973 [<url>http://ClinicalTrials.gov</url>].</p

La evaluación de residentes en las Unidades Docentes de Atención Familiar y Comunitaria de Madrid: ¿qué opinan los residentes y sus tutores?

Resumen: Introducción: La evaluación de residentes es un proceso complejo cuyas herramientas casi nunca generan certezas sobre el nivel competencial del evaluado. En las unidades docentes recae la responsabilidad de proponer la concesión de títulos de especialistas en ciencias de la salud, por ello realizan un esfuerzo continuo para la mejora del proceso dentro del nuevo marco normativo del Real Decreto 183/2008. Para afrontar cambios en el modelo evaluativo de las UUDDMM de AFyC de Madrid exploramos la opinión de tutores y residentes. Material y métodos: Estudio descriptivo transversal mediante encuesta on line a 841 residentes y 832 tutores de Medicina y Enfermería Familiar y Comunitaria. Resultados: La tasa de respuesta fue del 23,8% de los residentes (n = 200) y 39,4% de los tutores (n = 328). La mayoría realizan 4 o más entrevistas de tutorización anuales cuya principal dificultad declarada es la escasez de tiempo. Demuestran alta satisfacción con ellas por mejorar la relación personal y la calidad de la tutorización. Los residentes no desean sustituirlas por métodos a distancia. Encuentran poco útiles herramientas reflexivas como los incidentes críticos e informes de autorreflexión, a pesar de la alta implicación de sus tutores en esas herramientas. La mayoría considera que las fichas 1 de evaluación de rotaciones no reflejan adecuadamente el aprovechamiento en ellas. Proponen el informe anual del tutor como principal método de evaluación sumativa. Conclusiones: La evaluación de residentes debe sustentarse en la figura del tutor y un conjunto de herramientas, prioritariamente de evaluación formativa, que generen reflexión y un adecuado feed-back para continuar formándose. Abstract: Introduction: Assessment of residents is a complex process, for which the evaluation tools hardly ever produce certainty about the competence level. Residents’ teaching units have the responsibility of proposing the award of specialist degrees in health sciences, therefore they make a continuous effort to improve the process within the new regulatory framework in Spain. The opinion of tutors and residents were determined in order to address changes in the evaluation model of Primary Care teaching units in Madrid, Spain. Material and methods: Cross-sectional study based on an online survey of 841 residents and 832 tutors of Family Medicine and Community Nursing. Results: The response rate was 23.8% for residents (n = 200) and 39.4% for tutors (n = 328). Most of them conducted four or more mentoring interviews per year, for which the main difficulty stated was the lack of time. They showed high satisfaction with these interviews as they improved the relationship and the quality of mentoring. The residents did not want to replace them by distance methods. The residents did not consider reflective tools useful as critical incidents and reports of self-reflection, despite the high involvement of their tutors in those tools. Most considered that official documents to assess training stays do not reflect the benefit that they provide. They propose the annual report of the tutor as the primary method of summative evaluation. Conclusions: Assessment of residents must be based on the tutor and a set of tools, primarily by formative assessment, that lead to reflection and adequate feed-back to continue their education. Palabras clave: Educación médica, Evaluación, Residentes, Medicina de Familia, Enfermería Comunitaria, Keywords: Medical education, Evaluation, Residents, Family Medicine, Community Nursin

Oral versus intramuscular administration of vitamin B12 for the treatment of patients with vitamin B12 deficiency: a pragmatic, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority clinical trial undertaken in the primary healthcare setting (Project OB12)

Abstract Background The oral administration of vitamin B12 offers a potentially simpler and cheaper alternative to parenteral administration, but its effectiveness has not been definitively demonstrated. The following protocol was designed to compare the effectiveness of orally and intramuscularly administered vitamin B12 in the treatment of patients ≥65 years of age with vitamin B12 deficiency. Methods/design The proposed study involves a controlled, randomised, multicentre, parallel, non-inferiority clinical trial lasting one year, involving 23 primary healthcare centres in the Madrid region (Spain), and patients ≥65 years of age. The minimum number of patients required for the study was calculated as 320 (160 in each arm). Bearing in mind an estimated 8-10% prevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency among the population of this age group, an initial sample of 3556 patients will need to be recruited. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatment arms. In the intramuscular treatment arm, vitamin B12 will be administered as follows: 1 mg on alternate days in weeks 1 and 2, 1 mg/week in weeks 3–8,and 1 mg/month in weeks 9–52. In the oral arm, the vitamin will be administered as: 1 mg/day in weeks 1–8 and 1 mg/week in weeks 9–52. The main outcome variable to be monitored in both treatment arms is the normalisation of the serum vitamin B12 concentration at weeks 8, 26 and 52; the secondary outcome variables include the serum concentration of vitamin B12 (in pg/ml), adherence to treatment, quality of life (EuroQoL-5D questionnaire), patient 3satisfaction and patient preferences. All statistical tests will be performed with intention to treat and per protocol. Logistic regression with random effects will be used to adjust for prognostic factors. Confounding factors or factors that might alter the effect recorded will be taken into account in analyses. Discussion The results of this study should help establish, taking quality of life into account, whether the oral administration of vitamin B12 is an effective alternative to its intramuscular administration. If this administration route is effective, it should provide a cheaper means of treating vitamin B12 deficiency while inducing fewer adverse effects. Having such an alternative would also allow patient preferences to be taken into consideration at the time of prescribing treatment. Trial registration This trial has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT 01476007, and under EUDRACT number 2010-024129-20.</p