Evaluation of the impact of the GRACE risk score on the management and outcome of patients hospitalised with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome in the UK: protocol of the UKGRIS cluster-randomised registry-based trial

Introduction For non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) there is a gap between the use of class 1 guideline recommended therapies and clinical practice. The GRACE risk score is recommended in international guidelines for the risk stratification of NSTEACS, but its impact on adherence to guideline-indicated treatments and reducing adverse clinical outcomes is unknown. The objective of the UKGRIS trial is to assess the effectiveness of the GRACE risk score tool and associated treatment recommendations on the use of guideline-indicated care and clinical outcomes. Methods and Analysis The UK GRACE Risk Score Intervention Study (UKGRIS), a parallel-group cluster randomised registry-based controlled trial, will allocate hospitals in a 1:1 ratio to manage NSTEACS by standard care or according to the GRACE risk score and associated international guidelines. UKGRIS will recruit a minimum of 3000 patients from at least 30 English National Health Service hospitals and collect healthcare data from national electronic health records. The co-primary endpoints are the use of guideline-indicated therapies, and the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, new onset heart failure hospitalisation or cardiovascular readmission at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include duration of inpatient hospital stay over 12 months, EQ-5D-5L responses and utilities, unscheduled revascularisation and the components of the composite endpoint over 12 months follow-up. Ethics and Dissemination The study has ethical approval (North East - Tyne & Wear South Research Ethics Committee ref: 4/NE/1180). Findings will be announced at relevant conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals in line with the funder’s open access policy. Registration ISRCTN29731761, registered 12th January 2017

Hypertension Management Using Mobile Technology and Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Results of a Randomized Trial in Two Low/Middle-Income Countries

Abstract Objective: Hypertension and other noncommunicable diseases represent a growing threat to low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Mobile health technologies may improve noncommunicable disease outcomes, but LMICs lack resources to provide these services. We evaluated the efficacy of a cloud computing model using automated self-management calls plus home blood pressure (BP) monitoring as a strategy for improving systolic BPs (SBPs) and other outcomes of hypertensive patients in two LMICs. Subjects and Methods: This was a randomized trial with a 6-week follow-up. Participants with high SBPs (≥140?mm Hg if nondiabetic and ≥130?mm Hg if diabetic) were enrolled from clinics in Honduras and Mexico. Intervention patients received weekly automated monitoring and behavior change telephone calls sent from a server in the United States, plus a home BP monitor. At baseline, control patients received BP results, hypertension information, and usual healthcare. The primary outcome, SBP, was examined for all patients in addition to a preplanned subgroup with low literacy or high hypertension information needs. Secondary outcomes included perceived health status and medication-related problems. Results: Of the 200 patients recruited, 181 (90%) completed follow-up, and 117 of 181 had low literacy or high hypertension information needs. The median annual income was $2,900 USD, and average educational attainment was 6.5 years. At follow-up intervention patients' SBPs decreased 4.2?mm Hg relative to controls (95% confidence interval ?9.1, 0.7; p=0.09). In the subgroup with high information needs, intervention patients' average SBPs decreased 8.8?mm Hg (?14.2, ?3.4, p=0.002). Compared with controls, intervention patients at follow-up reported fewer depressive symptoms (p=0.004), fewer medication problems (p<0.0001), better general health (p<0.0001), and greater satisfaction with care (p≤0.004). Conclusions: Automated telephone care management plus home BP monitors can improve outcomes for hypertensive patients in LMICs. A cloud computing model within regional telecommunication centers could make these services available in areas with limited infrastructure for patient-focused informatics support.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98494/1/tmj%2E2011%2E0271.pd

Validation of Self-Reported Health Literacy Questions Among Diverse English and Spanish-Speaking Populations

BackgroundLimited health literacy (HL) contributes to poor health outcomes and disparities, and direct measurement is often time-intensive. Self-reported HL questions have not been validated among Spanish-speaking and diverse English-speaking populations.ObjectiveTo evaluate three self-reported questions: 1 "How confident are you filling out medical forms?"; 2 "How often do you have problems learning about your medical condition because of difficulty understanding written information?"; and 3 "How often do you have someone help you read hospital materials?" Answers were based on a 5-point Likert scale.DesignThis was a validation study nested within a trial of diabetes self-management support in the San Francisco Department of Public Health.ParticipantsEnglish and Spanish-speaking adults with type 2 diabetes receiving primary care.MethodsUsing the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (s-TOFHLA) in English and Spanish as the reference, we classified HL as inadequate, marginal, or adequate. We calculated the C-index and test characteristics of the three questions and summative scale compared to the s-TOFHLA and assessed variations in performance by language, race/ethnicity, age, and education.Key resultsOf 296 participants, 48% were Spanish-speaking; 9% were White, non-Hispanic; 47% had inadequate HL and 12% had marginal HL. Overall, 57% reported being confident with forms "somewhat" or less. The "confident with forms" question performed best for detecting inadequate (C-index = 0.82, (0.77-0.87)) and inadequate plus marginal HL (C index = 0.81, (0.76-0.86); p&lt;0.01 for differences from other questions), and performed comparably to the summative scale. The "confident with forms" question and scale also performed best across language, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and age.ConclusionsA single self-reported HL question about confidence with forms and a summative scale of three questions discriminated between Spanish and English speakers with adequate HL and those with inadequate and/or inadequate plus marginal HL. The "confident with forms" question or the summative scale may be useful for estimating HL in clinical research involving Spanish-speaking and English-speaking, chronically-ill, diverse populations

Challenges and Opportunities: What Can We Learn from Patients Living with Chronic Musculoskeletal Conditions, Health Professionals and Carers about the Concept of Health Literacy Using Qualitative Methods of Inquiry?

The field of health literacy continues to evolve and concern public health researchers and yet remains a largely overlooked concept elsewhere in the healthcare system. We conducted focus group discussions in England UK, about the concept of health literacy with older patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions (mean age = 73.4 years), carers and health professionals. Our research posed methodological, intellectual and practical challenges. Gaps in conceptualisation and expectations were revealed, reiterating deficiencies in predominant models for understanding health literacy and methodological shortcomings of using focus groups in qualitative research for this topic. Building on this unique insight into what the concept of health literacy meant to participants, we present analysis of our findings on factors perceived to foster and inhibit health literacy and on the issue of responsibility in health literacy. Patients saw health literacy as a result of an inconsistent interactive process and the implications as wide ranging; healthcare professionals had more heterogeneous views. All focus group discussants agreed that health literacy most benefited from good inter-personal communication and partnership. By proposing a needs-based approach to health literacy we offer an alternative way of conceptualising health literacy to help improve the health of older people with chronic conditions

Design of a prospective cohort study to assess ethnic inequalities in patient safety in hospital care using mixed methods

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While US studies show a higher risk of adverse events (AEs) for ethnic minorities in hospital care, in Europe ethnic inequalities in patient safety have never been analysed. Based on existing literature and exploratory research, our research group developed a conceptual model and empirical study to increase our understanding of the role ethnicity plays in patient safety. Our study is designed to (1) assess the risk of AEs for hospitalised patients of non-Western ethnic origin in comparison to ethnic Dutch patients; (2) analyse what patient-related determinants affect the risk of AEs; (3) explore the mechanisms of patient-provider interactions that may increase the risk of AEs; and (4) explore possible strategies to prevent inequalities in patient safety.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We are conducting a prospective mixed methods cohort study in four Dutch hospitals, which began in 2010 and is running until 2013. 2000 patients (1000 ethnic Dutch and 1000 of non-Western ethnic origin, ranging in age from 45-75 years) are included. Survey data are collected to capture patients’ explanatory variables (e.g., Dutch language proficiency, health literacy, socio-economic status (SES)-indicators, and religion) during hospital admission. After discharge, a two-stage medical record review using a standardized instrument is conducted by experienced reviewers to determine the incidence of AEs. Data will be analysed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Qualitative interviews with providers and patients will provide insight into the mechanisms of AEs and potential prevention strategies.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study uses a robust study plan to quantify the risk difference of AEs between ethnic minority and Dutch patients in hospital care. In addition we are developing an in-depth description of the mechanisms of excess risk for some groups compared to others, while identifying opportunities for more equitable distributions of patient safety for all.</p

Rationale and design for SHAREHD: a quality improvement collaborative to scale up Shared Haemodialysis Care for patients on centre based haemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: The study objective is to assess the effectiveness and economic impact of a structured programme to support patient involvement in centre-based haemodialysis and to understand what works for whom in what circumstances and why. It implements a program of Shared Haemodialysis Care (SHC) that aims to improve experience and outcomes for those who are treated with centre-based haemodialysis, and give more patients the confidence to dialyse independently both at centres and at home. METHODS/DESIGN: The 24 month mixed methods cohort evaluation of 600 prevalent centre based HD patients is nested within a 30 month quality improvement program that aims to scale up SHC at 12 dialysis centres across England. SHC describes an intervention where patients who receive centre-based haemodialysis are given the opportunity to learn, engage with and undertake tasks associated with their treatment. Following a 6-month set up period, a phased implementation programme is initiated across 12 dialysis units using a randomised stepped wedge design with 6 centres participating in each of 2 steps, each lasting 6 months. The intervention utilises quality improvement methodologies involving rapid tests of change to determine the most appropriate mechanisms for implementation in the context of a learning collaborative. Running parallel with the stepped wedge intervention is a mixed methods cohort evaluation that employs patient questionnaires and interviews, and will link with routinely collected data at the end of the study period. The primary outcome measure is the number of patients performing at least 5 dialysis-related tasks collected using 3 monthly questionnaires. Secondary outcomes measures include: the number of people choosing to perform home haemodialysis or dialyse independently in-centre by the end of the study period; end-user recommendation; home dialysis establishment delay; staff impact and confidence; hospitalisation; infection and health economics. DISCUSSION: The results from this study will provide evidence of impact of SHC, barriers to patient and centre level adoption and inform development of future interventions to support its implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Number: 93999549 , (retrospectively registered 1st May 2017); NIHR Research Portfolio: 31566

No More Free Drug Samples?

Susan Chimonas and Jerome Kassirer argue that giving out “free” drug samples is not effective in improving drug access for the indigent, does not promote rational drug use, and raises the cost of care

Misperceptions About β-Blockers and Diuretics

Based on a series of clinical trials showing no difference in the effectiveness or tolerability of most major classes of antihypertensive medications, the Joint National Commission on High Blood Pressure Treatment recommends that physicians prescribe β-blockers or diuretics as initial hypertensive therapy unless there are compelling indications for another type of medication. Nevertheless, many physicians continue to favor more expensive medications like angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and calcium channel blockers as first line agents. The persistent use of these agents raises questions as to whether physicians perceive ACE inhibitors and calcium channel blockers to be better than β-blockers and diuretics. METHODS:  We surveyed 1,200 primary care physicians in 1997, and another 500 primary care physicians in 2000, and asked them to estimate the relative effectiveness and side effects of 4 classes of medication in treating a hypothetical patient with uncomplicated hypertension: ACE inhibitors, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics. In addition, we asked them to indicate whether they ever provided free samples of hypertension medications to their patients. RESULTS:  Perceptions of the relative effectiveness and side effects of the 4 classes of hypertension medications did not significantly change over the 3 years, nor did prescription recommendations. Physicians perceive that diuretics are less effective at lowering blood pressure than the other 3 classes ( P  < .001). They also perceive that β-blockers are less tolerated than the other 3 classes ( P  < .001). In a multivariate model, perceptions of effectiveness and tolerability displayed significant associations with prescription preference independent of background variables. The only other variable to contribute significantly to the model was provision of free medication samples to patients. CONCLUSIONS:  Despite numerous clinical trials showing no difference in the effectiveness or side-effect profiles of these 4 classes of drugs, most physicians believed that diuretics were less effective and β-blockers were less tolerated than other medications. Moreover, their prescription practices were associated with their provision of free samples provided by pharmaceutical representatives, even after adjusting for other demographic characteristics. Efforts to increase physicians’ prescribing of β-blockers and diuretics may need to be directed at overcoming misunderstandings about the effectiveness and tolerability of these medicines. J GEN INTERN MED 2003;18:977–983.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75385/1/j.1525-1497.2003.20414.x.pd