Hypertension and type 2 diabetes: What family physicians can do to improve control of blood pressure - an observational study

Background: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes is rising, and most of these patients also have hypertension, substantially increasing the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The majority of these patients do not reach target blood pressure levels for a wide variety of reasons. When a literature review provided no clear focus for action when patients are not at target, we initiated a study to identify characteristics of patients and providers associated with achieving target BP levels in community-based practice. Methods: We conducted a practice- based, cross-sectional observational and mailed survey study. The setting was the practices of 27 family physicians and nurse practitioners in 3 eastern provinces in Canada. The participants were all patients with type 2 diabetes who could understand English, were able to give consent, and would be available for follow-up for more than one year. Data were collected from each patient’s medical record and from each patient and physician/nurse practitioner by mailed survey. Our main outcome measures were overall blood pressure at target (< 130/80), systolic blood pressure at target, and diastolic blood pressure at target. Analysis included initial descriptive statistics, logistic regression models, and multivariate regression using hierarchical nonlinear modeling (HNLM). Results: Fifty-four percent were at target for both systolic and diastolic pressures. Sixty-two percent were at systolic target, and 79% were at diastolic target. Patients who reported eating food low in salt had higher odds of reaching target blood pressure. Similarly, patients reporting low adherence to their medication regimen had lower odds of reaching target blood pressure. Conclusions: When primary care health professionals are dealing with blood pressures above target in a patient with type 2 diabetes, they should pay particular attention to two factors. They should inquire about dietary salt intake, strongly emphasize the importance of reduction, and refer for detailed counseling if necessary. Similarly, they should inquire about adherence to the medication regimen, and employ a variety of patient-oriented strategies to improve adherence

Comparison of heart team vs interventional cardiologist recommendations for the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

Abstract: Importance: Although the heart team approach is recommended in revascularization guidelines, the frequency with which heart team decisions differ from those of the original treating interventional cardiologist is unknown. Objective: To examine the difference in decisions between the heart team and the original treating interventional cardiologist for the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Design, setting, and participants: In this cross-sectional study, 245 consecutive patients with multivessel coronary artery disease were recruited from 1 high-volume tertiary care referral center (185 patients were enrolled through a screening process, and 60 patients were retrospectively enrolled from the center's database). A total of 237 patients were included in the final virtual heart team analysis. Treatment decisions (which comprised coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, and medication therapy) were made by the original treating interventional cardiologists between March 15, 2012, and October 20, 2014. These decisions were then compared with pooled-majority treatment decisions made by 8 blinded heart teams using structured online case presentations between October 1, 2017, and October 15, 2018. The randomized members of the heart teams comprised experts from 3 domains, with each team containing 1 noninvasive cardiologist, 1 interventional cardiologist, and 1 cardiovascular surgeon. Cases in which all 3 of the heart team members disagreed and cases in which procedural discordance occurred (eg, 2 members chose coronary artery bypass grafting and 1 member chose percutaneous coronary intervention) were discussed in a face-to-face heart team review in October 2018 to obtain pooled-majority decisions. Data were analyzed from May 6, 2019, to April 22, 2020. Main outcomes and measures: The Cohen κ coefficient between the treatment recommendation from the heart team and the treatment recommendation from the original treating interventional cardiologist. Results: Among 234 of 237 patients (98.7%) in the analysis for whom complete data were available, the mean (SD) age was 67.8 (10.9) years; 176 patients (75.2%) were male, and 191 patients (81.4%) had stenosis in 3 epicardial coronary vessels. A total of 71 differences (30.3%; 95% CI, 24.5%-36.7%) in treatment decisions between the heart team and the original treating interventional cardiologist occurred, with a Cohen κ of 0.478 (95% CI, 0.336-0.540; P = .006). The heart team decision was more frequently unanimous when it was concordant with the decision of the original treating interventional cardiologist (109 of 163 cases [66.9%]) compared with when it was discordant (28 of 71 cases [39.4%]; P < .001). When the heart team agreed with the original treatment decision, there was more agreement between the heart team interventional cardiologist and the original treating interventional cardiologist (138 of 163 cases [84.7%]) compared with when the heart team disagreed with the original treatment decision (14 of 71 cases [19.7%]); P < .001). Those with an original treatment of coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, and medication therapy, 32 of 148 patients [22.3%], 32 of 71 patients [45.1%], and 6 of 15 patients [40.0%], respectively, received a different treatment recommendation from the heart team than the original treating interventional cardiologist; the difference across the 3 groups was statistically significant (P = .002). Conclusions and relevance: The heart team's recommended treatment for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease differed from that of the original treating interventional cardiologist in up to 30% of cases. This subset of cases was associated with a lower frequency of unanimous decisions within the heart team and less concordance between the interventional cardiologists; discordance was more frequent when percutaneous coronary intervention or medication therapy were considered. Further research is needed to evaluate whether heart team decisions are associated with improvements in outcomes and, if so, how to identify patients for whom the heart team approach would be beneficial

Applicability of Preoperative Nuclear Morphometry to Evaluating Risk for Cervical Lymph Node Metastasis in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Background: We previously reported the utility of preoperative nuclear morphometry for evaluating risk for cervical lymph node metastases in tongue squamous cell carcinoma. The risk for lymph node metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma, however, is known to differ depending on the anatomical site of the primary tumor, such as the tongue, gingiva, mouth floor, and buccal mucosa. In this study, we evaluated the applicability of this morphometric technique to evaluating the risk for cervical lymph node metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Methods: A digital image system was used to measure the mean nuclear area, mean nuclear perimeter, nuclear circular rate, ratio of nuclear length to width (aspect ratio), and nuclear area coefficient of variation (NACV). Relationships between these parameters and nodal status were evaluated by t-test and logistic regression analysis. Results: Eighty-eight cases of squamous cell carcinoma (52 of the tongue, 25 of the gingiva, 4 of the buccal mucosa, and 7 of the mouth floor) were included: 46 with positive node classification and 42 with negative node classification. Nuclear area and perimeter were significantly larger in node-positive cases than in nodenegative cases; however, there were no significant differences in circular rate, aspect ratio, or NACV. We derived two risk models based on the results of multivariate analysis: Model 1, which identified age and mean nuclear area and Model 2, which identified age and mean nuclear perimeter. It should be noted that primary tumor site was not associated the pN-positive status. There were no significant differences in pathological nodal status by aspect ratio, NACV, or primary tumor site. Conclusion: Our method of preoperative nuclear morphometry may contribute valuable information to evaluations of the risk for lymph node metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Evaluation of a Novel Two-Step Server Selection Metric

Choosing the best-performing server for a particular client from a group of replicated proxies is a difficult task. We offer a novel, two-step technique for server selection that chooses a small subset of five servers, and isolates testing to that subset for ten days. We present an empirical evaluation of both our method and previously proposed metrics based on traces to 193 commercial proxies. We show that our technique performs better than any of the other metrics we studied — often one to two seconds better for a one-megabyte file — while requiring considerably less work over time. Metrics such as round-trip time and tests using small files usually select servers that are two to three times worse than the best server. Network-layer metrics such as minimizing router and autonomous system count poorly predict which server provides the best performance. These metrics often select servers with transfer times four to six times that of the best-performing serve

Evaluation of a Novel Two-Step Server Selection Metric

Choosing the best-performing server for a particular client from a group of replicated proxies is a difficult task. We offer a novel, two-step technique for server selection that chooses a small subset of five servers, and isolates testing to that subset for ten days. We present an empirical evaluation of both our method and previously proposed metrics based on traces to 193 commercial proxies. We show that our technique performs better than any of the other metrics we studied — often one to two seconds better for a one-megabyte file — while requiring considerably less work over time. Metrics such as round-trip time and tests using small files usually select servers that are two to three times worse than the best server. Network-layer metrics such as minimizing router and autonomous system count poorly predict which server provides the best performance. These metrics often select servers with transfer times four to six times that of the best-performing serve