Rationale, design and conduct of a randomised controlled trial evaluating a primary care-based complex intervention to improve the quality of life of heart failure patients: HICMan (Heidelberg Integrated Case Management) : study protocol

Background: Chronic congestive heart failure (CHF) is a complex disease with rising prevalence, compromised quality of life (QoL), unplanned hospital admissions, high mortality and therefore high burden of illness. The delivery of care for these patients has been criticized and new strategies addressing crucial domains of care have been shown to be effective on patients' health outcomes, although these trials were conducted in secondary care or in highly organised Health Maintenance Organisations. It remains unclear whether a comprehensive primary care-based case management for the treating general practitioner (GP) can improve patients' QoL. Methods/Design: HICMan is a randomised controlled trial with patients as the unit of randomisation. Aim is to evaluate a structured, standardized and comprehensive complex intervention for patients with CHF in a 12-months follow-up trial. Patients from intervention group receive specific patient leaflets and documentation booklets as well as regular monitoring and screening by a prior trained practice nurse, who gives feedback to the GP upon urgency. Monitoring and screening address aspects of disease-specific selfmanagement, (non)pharmacological adherence and psychosomatic and geriatric comorbidity. GPs are invited to provide a tailored structured counselling 4 times during the trial and receive an additional feedback on pharmacotherapy relevant to prognosis (data of baseline documentation). Patients from control group receive usual care by their GPs, who were introduced to guidelineoriented management and a tailored health counselling concept. Main outcome measurement for patients' QoL is the scale physical functioning of the SF-36 health questionnaire in a 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes are the disease specific QoL measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy questionnaire (KCCQ), depression and anxiety disorders (PHQ-9, GAD-7), adherence (EHFScBS and SANA), quality of care measured by an adapted version of the Patient Chronic Illness Assessment of Care questionnaire (PACIC) and NTproBNP. In addition, comprehensive clinical data are collected about health status, comorbidity, medication and health care utilisation. Discussion: As the targeted patient group is mostly cared for and treated by GPs, a comprehensive primary care-based guideline implementation including somatic, psychosomatic and organisational aspects of the delivery of care (HICMAn) is a promising intervention applying proven strategies for optimal care. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN30822978

Repeatability of short-duration transient visual evoked potentials in normal subjects

To evaluate the within-session and inter-session repeatability of a new, short-duration transient visual evoked potential (SD-tVEP) device on normal individuals, we tested 30 normal subjects (20/20 visual acuity, normal 24-2 SITA Standard VF) with SD-tVEP. Ten of these subjects had their tests repeated within 1–2 months from the initial visit. Synchronized single-channel EEG was recorded using a modified Diopsys Enfant™ System (Diopsys, Inc., Pine Brook, New Jersey, USA). A checkerboard stimulus was modulated at two reversals per second. Two different contrasts of checkerboard reversal patterns were used: 85% Michelson contrast with a mean luminance of 66.25 cd/m2 and 10% Michelson contrast with a mean luminance of 112 cd/m2. Each test lasted 20 s. Both eyes, independently and together, were tested 10 times (5 times at each contrast level). The following information was identified from the filtered N75-P100-N135 complex: N75 amplitude, N75 latency, P100 amplitude, P100 latency, and Delta Amplitude (N75-P100). The median values for each eye’s five SD-tVEP parameters were calculated and grouped into two data sets based on contrast level. Mean age was 27.3 ± 5.2 years. For OD only, the median (95% confidence intervals) of Delta Amplitude (N75-P100) amplitudes at 10% and 85% contrast were 4.6 uV (4.1–5.9) and 7.1 uV (5.15–9.31). The median P100 latencies were 115.2 ms (112.0–117.7) and 104.0 ms (99.9–106.0). There was little within-session variability for any of these parameters. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged between 0.64 and 0.98, and within subject coefficients of variation were 3–5% (P100 latency) and 15–30% (Delta Amplitude (N75-P100) amplitude). Bland–Altman plots showed good agreement between the first and fifth test sessions (85% contrast Delta Amplitude (N75-P100) delta amplitude, mean difference, 0.48 mV, 95% CI, −0.18–1.12; 85% contrast P100 latency delay, −0.82 ms, 95% CI, −3.12–1.46; 10% contrast Delta Amplitude (N75-P100) amplitude, 0.58 mV, 95% CI, −0.27–1.45; 10% contrast P100 latency delay, −2.05 mV, 95% CI, −5.12–1.01). The inter-eye correlation and agreement were significant for both SD-tVEP amplitude and P100 latency measurements. For the subset of eyes in which the inter-session repeatability was tested, the intraclass correlation coefficients ranged between 0.71 and 0.86 with good agreement shown on Bland–Altman plots. Short-duration transient VEP technology showed good within-session, inter-session repeatability, and good inter-eye correlation and agreement

Supplementary Material for: Specific Collaborative Group Intervention for Patients with Medically Unexplained Symptoms in General Practice: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are frequent in primary care and substantially impaired in their quality of life (QoL). Specific training of general practitioners (GPs) alone did not demonstrate sustained improvement at later follow-up in current reviews. We evaluated a collaborative group intervention. Methods: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial. Thirty-five GPs recruited 304 MUS patients (intervention group: 170; control group: 134). All GPs were trained in diagnosis and management of MUS (control condition). Eighteen randomly selected intervention GPs participated in training for a specific collaborative group intervention. They conducted 10 weekly group sessions and 2 booster meetings in their practices, together with a psychosomatic specialist. Six and 12 months after baseline, QoL was assessed with the Short-Form 36. The primary outcome was the physical composite score (PCS), and the secondary outcome was the mental composite score (MCS). Results: At 12 months, intention-to-treat analyses showed a significant between-group effect for the MCS (p = 0.023) but not for the PCS (p = 0.674). This effect was preceded by a significant reduction of somatic symptom severity (15-item somatic symptom severity scale of the Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-15) at 6 months (p = 0.008) that lacked significance at 12 months (p = 0.078). As additional between-group effects at 12 months, per-protocol analyses showed less health anxiety (Whiteley-7; p = 0.038) and less psychosocial distress (PHQ; p = 0.024); GP visits were significantly (p = 0.042) reduced in the intervention group. Conclusions: Compared to pure GP training, collaborative group intervention achieved a progressive, clinically meaningful improvement in mental but not physical QoL. It could bridge gaps between general practice and mental health care