Trajectories of self-rated health in people with diabetes: Associations with functioning in a prospective community sample

© 2013 Schmitz et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Background: Self-rated health (SRH) is a single-item measure that is one of the most widely used measures of general health in population health research. Relatively little is known about changes and the trajectories of SRH in people with chronic medical conditions. The aims of the present study were to identify and describe longitudinal trajectories of self-rated health (SRH) status in people with diabetes. Methods: A prospective community study was carried out between 2008 and 2011. SRH was assessed at baseline and yearly at follow-ups (n=1288). Analysis was carried out through trajectory modeling. The trajectory groups were subsequently compared at 4 years follow-up with respect to functioning. Results: Four distinct trajectories of SRH were identified: 1) 72.2% of the participants were assigned to a persistently good SRH trajectory; 2) 10.1% were assigned to a persistently poor SRH trajectory; 3) mean SRH scores changed from good to poor for one group (7.3%); while 4) mean SRH scores changed from poor to medium/good for another group (10.4%). Those with a persistently poor perception of health status were at higher risk for poor functioning at 4 years follow-up than those whose SRH scores decreased from good to poor. Conclusions: SRH is an important predictor for poor functioning in diabetes, but the trajectory of SRH seems to be even more important. Health professionals should pay attention to not only SRH per se, but also changes in SRH over time.This work was supported by Operating Grant MOP-84574 from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). GG was supported by a doctoral fellowship from the CIHR. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

Neighborhood socioeconomic status, Medicaid coverage and medical management of myocardial infarction: Atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) community surveillance

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pharmacologic treatments are efficacious in reducing post-myocardial infarction (MI) morbidity and mortality. The potential influence of socioeconomic factors on the receipt of pharmacologic therapy has not been systematically examined, even though healthcare utilization likely influences morbidity and mortality post-MI. This study aims to investigate the association between socioeconomic factors and receipt of evidence-based treatments post-MI in a community surveillance setting.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluated the association of census tract-level neighborhood household income (nINC) and Medicaid coverage with pharmacologic treatments (aspirin, beta [β]-blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors; optimal therapy, defined as receipt of two or more treatments) received during hospitalization or at discharge among 9,608 MI events in the ARIC community surveillance study (1993-2002). Prevalence ratios (PR, 95% CI), adjusted for the clustering of hospitalized MI events within census tracts and within patients, were estimated using Poisson regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Seventy-eight percent of patients received optimal therapy. Low nINC was associated with a lower likelihood of receiving β-blockers (0.93, 0.87-0.98) and a higher likelihood of receiving ACE inhibitors (1.13, 1.04-1.22), compared to high nINC. Patients with Medicaid coverage were less likely to receive aspirin (0.92, 0.87-0.98), compared to patients without Medicaid coverage. These findings were independent of other key covariates.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>nINC and Medicaid coverage may be two of several socioeconomic factors influencing the complexities of medical care practice patterns.</p

The impact of personality factors on delay in seeking treatment of acute myocardial infarction

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Early hospital arrival and rapid intervention for acute myocardial infarction is essential for a successful outcome. Several studies have been unable to identify explanatory factors that slowed decision time. The present study examines whether personality, psychosocial factors, and coping strategies might explain differences in time delay from onset of symptoms of acute myocardial infarction to arrival at a hospital emergency room.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Questionnaires on coping strategies, personality dimensions, and depression were completed by 323 patients ages 26 to 70 who had suffered an acute myocardial infarction. Tests measuring stress adaptation were completed by 180 of them. The patients were then categorised into three groups, based on time from onset of symptoms until arrival at hospital, and compared using logistic regression analysis and general linear models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No correlation could be established between personality factors (i.e., extraversion, neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness) or depressive symptoms and time between onset of symptoms and arrival at hospital. Nor was there any significant relationship between self-reported patient coping strategies and time delay.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We found no significant relationship between personality factors, coping strategies, or depression and time delays in seeking hospital after an acute myocardial infraction.</p

The Comprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services (COMPASS) study: design and methods for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial

Background: Patients discharged home after stroke face significant challenges managing residual neurological deficits, secondary prevention, and pre-existing chronic conditions. Post-discharge care is often fragmented leading to increased healthcare costs, readmissions, and sub-optimal utilization of rehabilitation and community services. The COMprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services (COMPASS) Study is an ongoing cluster-randomized pragmatic trial to assess the effectiveness of a comprehensive, evidence-based, post-acute care model on patient-centered outcomes. Methods: Forty-one hospitals in North Carolina were randomized (as 40 units) to either implement the COMPASS care model or continue their usual care. The recruitment goal is 6000 patients (3000 per arm). Hospital staff ascertain and enroll patients discharged home with a clinical diagnosis of stroke or transient ischemic attack. Patients discharged from intervention hospitals receive 2-day telephone follow-up; a comprehensive clinic visit within 2 weeks that includes a neurological evaluation, assessments of social and functional determinants of health, and an individualized COMPASS Care PlanTM integrated with a community-specific resource database; and additional follow-up calls at 30 and 60 days post-stroke discharge. This model is consistent with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services transitional care management services provided by physicians or advanced practice providers with support from a nurse to conduct patient assessments and coordinate follow-up services. Patients discharged from usual care hospitals represent the control group and receive the standard of care in place at that hospital. Patient-centered outcomes are collected from telephone surveys administered at 90 days. The primary endpoint is patient-reported functional status as measured by the Stroke Impact Scale 16. Secondary outcomes are: caregiver strain, all-cause readmissions, mortality, healthcare utilization, and medication adherence. The study engages patients, caregivers, and other stakeholders (including policymakers, advocacy groups, payers, and local community coalitions) to advise and support the design, implementation, and sustainability of the COMPASS care model. Discussion: Given the high societal and economic burden of stroke, identifying a care model to improve recovery, independence, and quality of life is critical for stroke survivors and their caregivers. The pragmatic trial design provides a real-world assessment of the COMPASS care model effectiveness and will facilitate rapid implementation into clinical practice if successful