Protocol for the 'e-Nudge trial' : a randomised controlled trial of electronic feedback to reduce the cardiovascular risk of individuals in general practice [ISRCTN64828380]

Background: Cardiovascular disease (including coronary heart disease and stroke) is a major cause of death and disability in the United Kingdom, and is to a large extent preventable, by lifestyle modification and drug therapy. The recent standardisation of electronic codes for cardiovascular risk variables through the United Kingdom's new General Practice contract provides an opportunity for the application of risk algorithms to identify high risk individuals. This randomised controlled trial will test the benefits of an automated system of alert messages and practice searches to identify those at highest risk of cardiovascular disease in primary care databases. Design: Patients over 50 years old in practice databases will be randomised to the intervention group that will receive the alert messages and searches, and a control group who will continue to receive usual care. In addition to those at high estimated risk, potentially high risk patients will be identified who have insufficient data to allow a risk estimate to be made. Further groups identified will be those with possible undiagnosed diabetes, based either on elevated past recorded blood glucose measurements, or an absence of recent blood glucose measurement in those with established cardiovascular disease. Outcome measures: The intervention will be applied for two years, and outcome data will be collected for a further year. The primary outcome measure will be the annual rate of cardiovascular events in the intervention and control arms of the study. Secondary measures include the proportion of patients at high estimated cardiovascular risk, the proportion of patients with missing data for a risk estimate, and the proportion with undefined diabetes status at the end of the trial

An ongoing process: A qualitative study of how the alcohol-dependent free themselves of addiction through progressive abstinence

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Most people being treated for alcoholism are unable to successfully quit drinking within their treatment programs. In few cases do we know the full picture of how abstinence is achieved in Taiwan. We tracked processes of abstinence in alcohol-dependency disorders, based on study evidence and results. This research explores the process of recovery from the viewpoint of the alcohol-dependent.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Semi-structured interviews were conducted in two different settings, using purpose sampling, during 2003-2004. The data were analyzed using content analysis. Participants were 32 adults, purposefully selected from an Alcoholics Anonymous group and a psychiatric hospital in North Taiwan.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that the abstinence process is an ongoing process, in which the alcohol-dependent free themselves of addiction progressively. This process never ends or resolves in complete recovery. We have identified three stages in the struggle against alcoholism: the Indulgence, Ambivalence and Attempt (IAA) cycle, in which the sufferer is trapped in a cycle of attempting to give up and failing; the Turning Point, in which a Personal Nadir is reached, and the Ongoing Process of abstinence, in which a constant effort is made to remain sober through willpower and with the help of support groups. We also discuss Influencing Factors that can derail abstinence attempts, pushing the sufferer back into the IAA cycle.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study provides important points of reference for alcohol and drug service workers and community healthcare professionals in Taiwan, casting light on the abstinence process and providing a basis for intervention or rehabilitation services.</p

Development of a context model to prioritize drug safety alerts in CPOE systems

Background: Computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE) can reduce the number of medication errors and adverse drug events (ADEs) in healthcare institutions. Unfortunately, they tend to produce a large number of partly irrelevant alerts, in turn leading to alert overload and causing alert fatigue. The objective of this work is to identify factors that can be used to prioritize and present alerts depending on the 'context' of a clinical situation. Methods: We used a combination of literature searches and expert interviews to identify and validate the possible context factors. The internal validation of the context factors was performed by calculating the inter-rater agreement of two researcher's classification of 33 relevant articles. Results: We developed a context model containing 20 factors. We grouped these context factors into three categories: characteristics of the patient or case (e. g. clinical status of the patient); characteristics of the organizational unit or user (e. g. professional experience of the user); and alert characteristics (e. g. severity of the effect). The internal validation resulted in nearly perfect agreement (Cohen's Kappa value of 0.97). Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first structured attempt to develop a comprehensive context model for prioritizing drug safety alerts in CPOE systems. The outcome of this work can be used to develop future tailored drug safety alerting in CPOE systems