SToRytelling to Improve Disease outcomes in Gout (STRIDE-GO): A multicenter, randomized controlled trial in African American veterans with gout

BACKGROUND: Urate-lowering therapy (ULT) adherence is low in gout, and few, if any, effective, low-cost, interventions are available. Our objective was to assess if a culturally appropriate gout-storytelling intervention is superior to an attention control for improving gout outcomes in African-Americans (AAs). METHODS: In a 1-year, multicenter, randomized controlled trial, AA veterans with gout were randomized to gout-storytelling intervention vs. a stress reduction video (attention control group; 1:1 ratio). The primary outcome was ULT adherence measured with MEMSCap™, an electronic monitoring system that objectively measured ULT medication adherence. RESULTS: The 306 male AA veterans with gout who met the eligibility criteria were randomized to the gout-storytelling intervention (n = 152) or stress reduction video (n = 154); 261/306 (85%) completed the 1-year study. The mean age was 64 years, body mass index was 33 kg/m CONCLUSIONS: A culturally appropriate gout-storytelling intervention was not superior to attention control for improving gout outcomes in AAs with gout. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02741700

Core Competencies in Evidence-Based Practice for Health Professionals. Consensus Statement Based on a Systematic Review and Delphi Survey

Importance Evidence-based practice (EBP) is necessary for improving the quality of health care as well as patient outcomes. Evidence-based practice is commonly integrated into the curricula of undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing professional development health programs. There is, however, inconsistency in the curriculum content of EBP teaching and learning programs. A standardized set of minimum core competencies in EBP that health professionals should meet has the potential to standardize and improve education in EBP. Objective To develop a consensus set of core competencies for health professionals in EBP. Evidence Review For this modified Delphi survey study, a set of EBP core competencies that should be covered in EBP teaching and learning programs was developed in 4 stages: (1) generation of an initial set of relevant EBP competencies derived from a systematic review of EBP education studies for health professionals; (2) a 2-round, web-based Delphi survey of health professionals, selected using purposive sampling, to prioritize and gain consensus on the most essential EBP core competencies; (3) consensus meetings, both face-to-face and via video conference, to finalize the consensus on the most essential core competencies; and (4) feedback and endorsement from EBP experts. Findings From an earlier systematic review of 83 EBP educational intervention studies, 86 unique EBP competencies were identified. In a Delphi survey of 234 participants representing a range of health professionals (physicians, nurses, and allied health professionals) who registered interest (88 [61.1%] women; mean [SD] age, 45.2 [10.2] years), 184 (78.6%) participated in round 1 and 144 (61.5%) in round 2. Consensus was reached on 68 EBP core competencies. The final set of EBP core competencies were grouped into the main EBP domains. For each key competency, a description of the level of detail or delivery was identified. Conclusions and Relevance A consensus-based, contemporary set of EBP core competencies has been identified that may inform curriculum development of entry-level EBP teaching and learning programs for health professionals and benchmark standards for EBP teaching

Core Competencies in Evidence-Based Practice for Health Professionals. Consensus Statement Based on a Systematic Review and Delphi Survey

Importance Evidence-based practice (EBP) is necessary for improving the quality of health care as well as patient outcomes. Evidence-based practice is commonly integrated into the curricula of undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing professional development health programs. There is, however, inconsistency in the curriculum content of EBP teaching and learning programs. A standardized set of minimum core competencies in EBP that health professionals should meet has the potential to standardize and improve education in EBP. Objective To develop a consensus set of core competencies for health professionals in EBP. Evidence Review For this modified Delphi survey study, a set of EBP core competencies that should be covered in EBP teaching and learning programs was developed in 4 stages: (1) generation of an initial set of relevant EBP competencies derived from a systematic review of EBP education studies for health professionals; (2) a 2-round, web-based Delphi survey of health professionals, selected using purposive sampling, to prioritize and gain consensus on the most essential EBP core competencies; (3) consensus meetings, both face-to-face and via video conference, to finalize the consensus on the most essential core competencies; and (4) feedback and endorsement from EBP experts. Findings From an earlier systematic review of 83 EBP educational intervention studies, 86 unique EBP competencies were identified. In a Delphi survey of 234 participants representing a range of health professionals (physicians, nurses, and allied health professionals) who registered interest (88 [61.1%] women; mean [SD] age, 45.2 [10.2] years), 184 (78.6%) participated in round 1 and 144 (61.5%) in round 2. Consensus was reached on 68 EBP core competencies. The final set of EBP core competencies were grouped into the main EBP domains. For each key competency, a description of the level of detail or delivery was identified. Conclusions and Relevance A consensus-based, contemporary set of EBP core competencies has been identified that may inform curriculum development of entry-level EBP teaching and learning programs for health professionals and benchmark standards for EBP teaching

Association of consultation between generalists and cardiologists with quality and outcomes of heart failure care

BACKGROUND: The appropriate roles for generalists and cardiologists in the care of patients with heart failure (HF) are unknown. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to determine whether consultation between generalists and cardiologists was associated with better quality and outcomes of HF care. METHODS: We studied left ventricular function evaluation (LVFE) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) use and 90-day readmission and 90-day mortality rates in patients with HF who were hospitalized. Patient care was categorized into cardiologist (solo), generalist (solo), or consultative cares. The processes and outcomes of care were compared by care category using logistic regression analyses fit with generalized linear mixed models to adjust for hospital-related clustering. RESULTS: Of the 1075 patients studied, 13% received cardiologist care, 55% received generalist care, and 32% received consultative care. More patients who received consultative care (75%) received LVFE than patients who received generalist care (36%) and cardiologist care (53%; P \u3c.001). Fewer patients who received solo care (54% each) received ACEI compared with 71% of patients who received consultative care (P \u3c.001). After multivariable adjustment, consultative care was associated with higher odds of LVFE than generalist care (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 6.06; 95% CI, 3.97-9.26) or cardiologist care (adjusted OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.70-5.13) care. Consultation was also associated with higher odds of ACEI use compared with generalist (adjusted OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.42-4.12) or cardiologist (adjusted OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.14-4.72) care. Compared with patients who received generalist care, patients who received consultative care had lower odds of 90-day readmission (adjusted OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.86). CONCLUSION: Collaboration between generalists and cardiologists, rather than solo care by either, was associated with better HF processes and outcomes of care

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Prostate Cancer Early Detection, Version 2.2016

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for prostate cancer screening in healthy men who have elected to participate in an early detection program. The NCCN Guidelines focus on minimizing unnecessary procedures and limiting the detection of indolent disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Prostate Cancer Early Detection Panel's most significant discussions for the 2016 guideline update, which included issues surrounding screening in high-risk populations (ie, African Americans, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers), approaches to refine patient selection for initial and repeat biopsies, and approaches to improve biopsy specificity