Management of Type 2 Diabetes in Stage C Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Type 2 diabetes is an increasingly common comorbidity of stage C heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The two diseases are risk factors for each other and can bidirectionally independently worsen outcomes. The regulatory requirement of cardiovascular outcomes trials for antidiabetic agents has led to an emergence of novel therapies with robust benefits in heart failure, and clinicians must now ensure they are familiar with the management of patients with concurrent diabetes and stage C HFrEF. This review summarises the current evidence for the management of type 2 diabetes in stage C HFrEF, recapitulating data from landmark heart failure trials regarding the use of guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure in patients with diabetes. It also provides a preview of upcoming clinical trials in these populations

Click Worthy: Stories Encourage Emergency Physicians to Learn More About Opioid Prescribing Guidelines

Narrative vignettes outperform standard summaries in promoting engagement with opioid prescription guidelines among a national sample of emergency physicians

Communicating Guideline Recommendations Using Graphic Narrative Versus Text-Based Broadcast Screensavers: Design and Implementation Study

BackgroundThe use of graphic narratives, defined as stories that use images for narration, is growing in health communication. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to describe the design and implementation of a graphic narrative screensaver (GNS) to communicate a guideline recommendation (ie, avoiding low-value acid suppressive therapy [AST] use in hospital inpatients) and examine the comparative effectiveness of the GNS versus a text-based screensaver (TBS) on clinical practice (ie, low-value AST prescriptions) and clinician recall. MethodsDuring a 2-year period, the GNS and the TBS were displayed on inpatient clinical workstations. The numbers of new AST prescriptions were examined in the four quarters before, the three quarters during, and the one quarter after screensavers were implemented. Additionally, an electronic survey was sent to resident physicians 1 year after the intervention to assess screensaver recall. ResultsDesigning an aesthetically engaging graphic that could be rapidly understood was critical in the development of the GNS. The odds of receiving an AST prescription on medicine and medicine subspecialty services after the screensavers were implemented were lower for all four quarters (ie, GNS and TBS broadcast together, only TBS broadcast, only GNS broadcast, and no AST screensavers broadcast) compared to the quarter prior to implementation (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.92; OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97; OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95; and OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.89, respectively; P<.001 for all comparisons). There were no statistically significant decreases for other high-volume services, such as the surgical services. These declines appear to have begun prior to screensaver implementation. When surveyed about the screensaver content 1 year later, resident physicians recalled both the GNS and TBS (43/70, 61%, vs 54/70, 77%; P=.07) and those who recalled the screensaver were more likely to recall the main message of the GNS compared to the TBS (30/43, 70%, vs 1/54, 2%; P<.001). ConclusionsIt is feasible to use a graphic narrative embedded in a broadcast screensaver to communicate a guideline recommendation, but further study is needed to determine the impact of graphic narratives on clinical practice

What Factors Affect Physicians’ Decisions to Prescribe Opioids in Emergency Departments?

Objective: With 42% of all emergency department visits in the United States related to pain, physicians who work in this setting are tasked with providing adequate pain management to patients with varying primary complaints and medical histories. Complicating this, the United States is in the midst of an opioid overdose epidemic. State governments and national organizations have developed guidelines and legislation to curtail opioid prescriptions in acute care settings, while also incentivizing providers for patient satisfaction and completeness of pain control. In order to inform future policies that focus on provider pain medication prescribing, we sought to characterize the factors physicians weigh when considering treating pain with opioids in the emergency department. Methods: We conducted and transcribed open-ended, semistructured qualitative interviews with 52 physicians at a national emergency medicine conference. Results: Participants reported a wide range of factors contributing to their opioid prescribing patterns related to three domains: 1) provider assessment of pain characteristics, 2) patient-based considerations, and 3) practice environment. Pain characteristics include the characteristics of various acute and chronic pain syndromes, including physicians’ empathy due to their own experiences with pain. Patient characteristics include “trustworthiness,” race and ethnicity, and the concern for risk of misuse. Factors related to the practice environment include hospital policy, legislation/regulation, and guidelines. Conclusion: The decision to prescribe opioids to patients in the emergency department is complex and nuanced. Physicians are interested in guidance and are concerned about the competing pressures placed on their opioid prescribing due to incentives related to patient satisfaction scores on one hand and inflexible policies that do not allow for individualized, patient-centered decisions on the other