A cost-effective strategy for primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in children with pharyngitis

Primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in children depends on prompt and effective diagnosis and treatment of pharyngitis at the primary level of care. Cost-effectiveness modeling shows that the most cost-effective strategy for primary prevention in South Africa (SA) is to use a simple symptomatic clinical decision rule (CDR) to diagnose pharyngitis in children presenting at the primary level of care and then to treat them with a single dose of intramuscular penicillin. Treat All and CDR2+ strategies are affordable and simple and miss few cases of streptococcal pharyngitis at the primary level of care. The CDR2+ strategy is the most cost-effective for primary prevention of ARF and RHD in urban SA and should complement primordial and secondary prevention efforts

Light-to-moderate alcohol consumption and mortality in the physicians’ health study enrollment cohort

AbstractOBJECTIVESThis study examined the relationship between light-to-moderate alcohol consumption and cause-specific mortality.BACKGROUNDPrevious studies suggest a J-shaped relation between alcohol and total mortality in men. A decrease in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality without a significant increase in other causes of mortality may explain the overall risk reduction at light-to-moderate levels.METHODSWe conducted a prospective cohort study of 89,299 U.S. men from the Physicians’ Health Study enrollment cohort who were 40 to 84 years old in 1982 and free of known myocardial infarction, stroke, cancer or liver disease at baseline. Usual alcohol consumption was estimated by a limited food frequency questionnaire.RESULTSThere were 3,216 deaths over 5.5 years of follow-up. We observed a U-shaped relationship between alcohol consumption and total mortality. Compared with rarely/never drinkers, consumers of 1, 2 to 4 and 5 to 6 drinks per week and 1 drink per day had significant reductions in risk of death (multivariate relative risks [RRs] of 0.74, 0.77, 0.78 and 0.82, respectively) with no overall benefit or harm detected at the ≥2 drinks per day level (RR = 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.79 to 1.14). The relationship with CVD mortality was inverse or L-shaped with apparent risk reductions even in the highest category of ≥2 drinks per day (RR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.01). We found no clear harm or benefit for total or common site-specific cancers. For remaining other cancers, there was a nonsignificant 28% increased risk for those consuming ≥2 drinks per day.CONCLUSIONSThese data support a U-shaped relation between alcohol and total mortality among light-to-moderate drinking men. The U-shaped curve may reflect an inverse association for CVD mortality, no association for common site-specific cancers and a possible positive association for less common cancers

Socioeconomic and modifiable predictors of blood pressure control for hypertension in primary care attenders in the Western Cape, South Africa

Background. Low socioeconomic status is associated with the risk of hypertension. There are few reports of the effect of socioeconomic and potentially modifiable factors on the control of hypertension in South Africa (SA).Objectives. To investigate associations between patients’ socioeconomic status and characteristics of primary healthcare facilities, and control and treatment of blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Methods. We enrolled hypertensive patients attending 38 public sector primary care clinics in the Western Cape, SA, in 2011, and followed them up 14 months later as part of a randomised controlled trial. Blood pressure was measured and prescriptions for antihypertension medications were recorded at baseline and follow-up. Logistic regression models assessed associations between patients’ socioeconomic status, characteristics of primary healthcare facilities, and control and treatment of blood pressure.Results. Blood pressure was uncontrolled in 60% (1 917/3 220) of patients at baseline, which was less likely in patients with a higher level of education (p=0.001) and in English compared with Afrikaans respondents (p=0.033). Treatment was intensified in 48% (892/1 872) of patients with uncontrolled blood pressure at baseline and follow-up, which was more likely in patients with higher blood pressure at baseline (p<0.001), concurrent diabetes (p=0.013), more education (p=0.020), and those who attended clinics offering off-site drug supply (p=0.009), with a doctor every day (p=0.004), or with more nurses (p<0.001).Conclusion. Patient and clinic factors influence blood pressure control and treatment in primary care clinics in SA. Potential modifiable factors include ensuring effective communication of health messages, providing convenient access to medications, and addressing staff shortages in primary care clinic

A Comparative Assessment of Non-Laboratory-Based versus Commonly Used Laboratory-Based Cardiovascular Disease Risk Scores in the NHANES III Population

National and international primary CVD risk screening guidelines focus on using total CVD risk scores. Recently, we developed a non-laboratory-based CVD risk score (inputs: age, sex, smoking, diabetes, systolic blood pressure, treatment of hypertension, body-mass index), which can assess risk faster and at lower costs compared to laboratory-based scores (inputs include cholesterol values). We aimed to assess the exchangeability of the non-laboratory-based risk score to four commonly used laboratory-based scores (Framingham CVD [2008, 1991 versions], and Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation [SCORE] for low and high risk settings) in an external validation population.Analyses were based on individual-level, score-specific rankings of risk for adults in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) aged 25–74 years, without history of CVD or cancer (n = 5,999). Risk characterization agreement was based on overlap in dichotomous risk characterization (thresholds of 10-year risk >10–20%) and Spearman rank correlation. Risk discrimination was assessed using receiver operator characteristic curve analysis (10-year CVD death outcome). Risk characterization agreement ranged from 91.9–95.7% and 94.2–95.1% with Spearman correlation ranges of 0.957–0.980 and 0.946–0.970 for men and women, respectively. In men, c-statistics for the non-laboratory-based, Framingham (2008, 1991), and SCORE (high, low) functions were 0.782, 0.776, 0.781, 0.785, and 0.785, with p-values for differences relative to the non-laboratory-based score of 0.44, 0.89, 0.68 and 0.65, respectively. In women, the corresponding c-statistics were 0.809, 0.834, 0.821, 0.792, and 0.792, with corresponding p-values of 0.04, 0.34, 0.11 and 0.09, respectively.Every score discriminated risk of CVD death well, and there was high agreement in risk characterization between non-laboratory-based and laboratory-based risk scores, which suggests that the non-laboratory-based score can be a useful proxy for Framingham or SCORE functions in resource-limited settings. Future external validation studies can assess whether the sex-specific risk discrimination results hold in other populations

A cost-effective strategy for primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in children with pharyngitis

Primary prevention of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in children depends on prompt and effective diagnosis and treatment of pharyngitis at the primary level of care. Cost-effectiveness modeling shows that the most cost-effective strategy for primary prevention in South Africa (SA) is to use a simple symptomatic clinical decision rule (CDR) to diagnose pharyngitis in children presenting at the primary level of care and then to treat them with a single dose of intramuscular penicillin. Treat All and CDR2+ strategies are affordable and simple and miss few cases of streptococcal pharyngitis at the primary level of care. The CDR2+ strategy is the most cost-effective for primary prevention of ARF and RHD in urban SA and should complement primordial and secondary prevention efforts

Referral outcomes of individuals identified at high risk of cardiovascular disease by community health workers in Bangladesh, Guatemala, Mexico, and South Africa

We have found that community health workers (CHWs) with appropriate training are able to accurately identify people at high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in the community who would benefit from the introduction of preventative management, in Bangladesh, Guatemala, Mexico, and South Africa. This paper examines the attendance pattern for those individuals who were so identified and referred to a health care facility for further assessment and management. Patient records from the health centres in each site were reviewed for data on diagnoses made and treatment commenced. Reasons for non-attendance were sought from participants who had not attended after being referred. Qualitative data were collected from study coordinators regarding their experiences in obtaining the records and conducting the record reviews. The perspectives of CHWs and community members, who were screened, were also obtained

Cost-effectiveness analysis of sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

Importance  The angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and hospitalizations compared with enalapril. Sacubitril/valsartan has been approved for use in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction in the United States and cost has been suggested as 1 factor that will influence the use of this agent. Objective  To estimate the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants  Data from US adults (mean [SD] age, 63.8 [11.5] years) with HF with reduced ejection fraction and characteristics similar to those in the PARADIGM-HF trial were used as inputs for a 2-state Markov model simulated HF. Risks of all-cause mortality and hospitalization from HF or other reasons were estimated with a 30-year time horizon. Quality of life was based on trial EQ-5D scores. Hospital costs combined Medicare and private insurance reimbursement rates; medication costs included the wholesale acquisition cost for sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril. A discount rate of 3% was used. Sensitivity analyses were performed on key inputs including: hospital costs, mortality benefit, hazard ratio for hospitalization reduction, drug costs, and quality-of-life estimates. Main Outcomes and Measures  Hospitalizations, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental costs per QALY gained. Results  The 2-state Markov model of US adult patients (mean age, 63.8 years) calculated that there would be 220 fewer hospital admissions per 1000 patients with HF treated with sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril over 30 years. The incremental costs and QALYs gained with sacubitril/valsartan treatment were estimated at $35 512 and 0.78, respectively, compared with enalapril, equating to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of$45 017 per QALY for the base-case. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated ICERs ranging from $35 357 to$75 301 per QALY. Conclusions and Relevance  For eligible patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, the Markov model calculated that sacubitril/valsartan would increase life expectancy at an ICER consistent with other high-value accepted cardiovascular interventions. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated sacubitril/valsartan would remain cost-effective vs enalapril

ACC/AHA Special Report: Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation Strategies: A Summary of Systematic Reviews by the NHLBI Implementation Science Work Group: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND: In 2008, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an Implementation Science Work Group to assess evidence-based strategies for effectively implementing clinical practice guidelines. This was part of a larger effort to update existing clinical practice guidelines on cholesterol, blood pressure, and overweight/obesity. OBJECTIVES: Review evidence from the published implementation science literature and identify effective or promising strategies to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted on 4 critical questions, each focusing on the adoption and effectiveness of 4 intervention strategies: (1) reminders, (2) educational outreach visits, (3) audit and feedback, and (4) provider incentives. A scoping review of the Rx for Change database of systematic reviews was used to identify promising guideline implementation interventions aimed at providers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori for each question, and the published literature was initially searched up to 2012, and then updated with a supplemental search to 2015. Two independent reviewers screened the returned citations to identify relevant reviews and rated the quality of each included review. RESULTS: Audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care (15 of 21 reviews and 12 of 13 reviews, respectively) and clinical outcomes (7 of 12 reviews and 3 of 5 reviews, respectively). Provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness for improving both process of care (3 of 4 reviews) and clinical outcomes (3 reviews equally distributed between generally effective, mixed, and generally ineffective). Reminders showed mixed effectiveness for improving process of care outcomes (27 reviews with 11 mixed and 3 generally ineffective results) and were generally ineffective for clinical outcomes (18 reviews with 6 mixed and 9 generally ineffective results). Educational outreach visits (2 of 2 reviews), reminders (3 of 4 reviews), and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were generally effective for cost reduction. Educational outreach visits (1 of 1 review) and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were also generally effective for cost-effectiveness outcomes. Barriers to clinician adoption or adherence to guidelines included time constraints (8 reviews/overviews); limited staffing resources (2 overviews); timing (5 reviews/overviews); clinician skepticism (5 reviews/overviews); clinician knowledge of guidelines (4 reviews/overviews); and higher age of the clinician (1 overview). Facilitating factors included guideline characteristics such as format, resources, and end-user involvement (6 reviews/overviews); involving stakeholders (5 reviews/overviews); leadership support (5 reviews/overviews); scope of implementation (5 reviews/overviews); organizational culture such as multidisciplinary teams and low-baseline adherence (9 reviews/overviews); and electronic guidelines systems (3 reviews). CONCLUSION: The strategies of audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care and clinical outcomes. Reminders and provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness, or were generally ineffective. No general conclusion could be reached about cost effectiveness, because of limitations in the evidence. Important gaps exist in the evidence on effectiveness of implementation interventions, especially regarding clinical outcomes, cost effectiveness and contextual issues affecting successful implementation