Intervention to reduce excessive alcohol consumption and improve comorbidity outcomes in hypertensive or depressed primary care patients: two parallel cluster randomized feasibility trials

Wilson, G. B. Wray, C. McGovern, R. Newbury-Birch, D. McColl, E. Crosland, A. Background Many primary care patients with raised blood pressure or depression drink potentially hazardous levels of alcohol. Brief interventions (BI) to reduce alcohol consumption may improve comorbid conditions and reduce the risk of future alcohol problems. However,research has not established their effectiveness in this patient population. This study aimed to establish the feasibility of definitive trials of BI to reduce excessive drinking in primary care patients with hypertension or mild to moderate depression. Methods Thirteen general practices in North East England were randomized to the intervention or control arm of one of two parallel pilot trials. Adult patients drinking excessively and diagnosed with hypertension or mild-to-moderate depression received the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) by postal survey. Consenting respondents scoring more than 7 on AUDIT (score range 0 to 40) received brief alcohol consumption advice plus an information leaflet (intervention) or an information leaflet alone(control) with follow-up at six months. Measurements included the numbers of patients eligible, recruited, and retained, and the AUDIT score and systolic/diastolic blood pressure of each patient or the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score. Acceptability was assessed via practitioner feedback and patient willingness to be screened, recruited, and retained at follow-up. Results In the hypertension trial, 1709 of 33,813 adult patients(5.1%) were eligible and were surveyed. Among the eligible patients, 468 (27.4%) returned questionnaires; 166 (9.6% of those surveyed) screened positively on AUDIT and 83 (4.8% of those surveyed) were recruited (50.0% of positive screens). Sixty-seven cases (80.7% of recruited patients)completed follow-up at six months. In the depression trial, 1,044 of 73,146 adult patients(1.4%)were eligible and surveyed. Among these eligible patients, 215(20.6%)responded;104(10.0% of those surveyed)screened positively on AUDIT and 29 (2.8% of those surveyed) were recruited (27.9% of positive screens). Nineteen cases(65.5% of recruited patients)completed follow-up at six months. Conclusions Recruitment and retention rates were higher in the hypertension trial than in the depression trial. A full brief intervention trial appears feasible for primary care patients with hypertension who drink excessively. High AUDIT scores in the depression trial suggest the importance of alcohol intervention in this group. However, future work may require alternative screening and measurement procedures

Social deprivation, ethnicity, and uptake of living kidney donor transplantation in the United Kingdom

Background. Socioeconomic disparities and their contribution to the ethnic differences in living kidney donor transplantation have not been adequately studied.Methods. A total of 12,282 patients aged 18 to 69 years starting renal replacement therapy (January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2004) in the United Kingdom were included. Logistic regression models were used to examine probability of living donor transplantation within 3 years of renal replacement therapy. The effect of area deprivation (Townsend index) was studied among whites only adjusted for patient characteristics and the effect of ethnic origin (South Asians and blacks compared with whites) was then examined among all patients adjusting for area deprivation.Results. Among whites, increasing social deprivation was associated with lower odds of living donor transplantation. In the fully adjusted model, odds ratio (OR) for the most deprived quintile was 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33, 0.49; P trend&lt;0.0001) compared with the least deprived. These gradients were more pronounced among centers performing more live donor transplants (P value for interaction &lt;0.0001). South Asians and blacks had lower odds of living donor transplantation compared with whites, but there was an interaction with age (P&lt;0.0001), so that this disparity was observed only in those younger than 50 years (blacks: OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.18, 0.54; South Asians: OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34, 0.90; P value &lt;0.0001).Conclusions. Socially deprived and younger ethnic minority patients have lower probability of living kidney donor transplantation. The extent to which these inequalities reflect modifiable societal healthcare system barriers and donor/recipient factors requires further study.<br/

Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice

Item does not contain fulltextThe principles of shared decision making are well documented but there is a lack of guidance about how to accomplish the approach in routine clinical practice. Our aim here is to translate existing conceptual descriptions into a three-step model that is practical, easy to remember, and can act as a guide to skill development. Achieving shared decision making depends on building a good relationship in the clinical encounter so that information is shared and patients are supported to deliberate and express their preferences and views during the decision making process. To accomplish these tasks, we propose a model of how to do shared decision making that is based on choice, option and decision talk. The model has three steps: a) introducing choice, b) describing options, often by integrating the use of patient decision support, and c) helping patients explore preferences and make decisions. This model rests on supporting a process of deliberation, and on understanding that decisions should be influenced by exploring and respecting "what matters most" to patients as individuals, and that this exploration in turn depends on them developing informed preferences