Normalization of a conversation tool to promote shared decision making about anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation within a practical randomized trial of its effectiveness: a cross-sectional study

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) implementation remains challenging. The factors that promote or hinder implementation of SDM tools for use during the consultation, including contextual factors such as clinician burnout and organizational support, remain unclear. We explored these factors in the context of a practical multicenter randomized trial evaluating the effectiveness of an SDM conversation tool for patients with atrial fibrillation considering anticoagulation therapy.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we recruited clinicians who were regularly involved in conversations with patients regarding anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. Clinicians reported their characteristics and burnout symptoms using the two-item Maslach Burnout Inventory. Clinicians were trained in using the SDM tool, and they recorded their perceptions of the tool’s normalization potential using the Normalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) survey instrument and verbally reflected on their answers to these survey questions. When possible, the training sessions and clinicians’ verbal responses to the conversation tool were recorded.

Results

Our study comprised 183 clinicians recruited into the trial (168 with survey responses and 112 with recordings). Overall, clinicians gave high scores to the normalization potential of the intervention; they endorsed all domains of normalization to the same extent, regardless of site, clinician characteristics, or burnout ratings. In interviews, clinicians paid significant attention to making sense of the tool. Tool buy-in seemed to depend heavily on their ability to see the tool as accurate and “evidence-based” and their perceptions of having time in the consultation to use it.

Conclusions

While time in the consultation remains a barrier, we did not find a significant association between burnout symptoms and normalization of an SDM conversation tool. Possible areas for improving the normalization of SDM conversation tools in clinical practice include enabling collaboration among clinicians to implement the tool and reporting how clinicians elsewhere use the tool. Direct measures of normalization (i.e., observing how often clinicians access the tool in practice outside of the clinical trial) may further elucidate the role that contextual factors, such as clinician burnout, play in the implementation of SDM.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02905032. Registered on 9 September 2016.

Patterns of Use, Efficacy, and Safety of Treatment Options for Patients with Graves' Disease: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

Background: Considerable uncertainty remains about the pattern of use of treatment options for Graves' disease (GD) and their comparative effectiveness and safety. Methods: Between 2005 and 2013, we identified patients with GD who received antithyroid drugs (ATDs), radioactive iodine (RAI) or surgery, and were represented in a large administrative data set in the United States (OptumLabs^® Data Warehouse). Results: We identified 4661 patients with GD: mean age 48 (SD ±14) years, white (63%), and female (80%). Patients received ATD, n = 2817 (60%), RAI, n = 1549 (33%), or surgery, n = 295 (6%). Success rates were 50% for ATD, 93% for RAI, and 99% for surgery. Median time to treatment failure was 6.8 months for ATD and 3 months for RAI and surgery. When patients were required to be on ATD for at least one year before assessing failure, the failure rate decreased to 25%. Adverse effects occurred in 12% of patients receiving ATD, 6% with RAI, and 24% with surgery. Factors associated with treatment success were age >55 years (for ATD) and female sex (for RAI). About 12% of patients receiving ATD continued this treatment for >24 months as initial therapy. When patients failed ATD therapy, the most common second-line therapy was reinitiation of ATD (65%), RAI (26%), and surgery (9%). Overall, 26% of patients remain on ATD therapy (combined first or second line). Conclusions: ATD therapy was the most common GD therapy and demonstrated the lowest efficacy and infrequent significant adverse effect profile. With one fourth of patients remaining on ATD treatment (initial or second modality treatment), it becomes imperative to determine the long-term efficacy, safety, costs, and burdens of this modality of treatment.

Is My Patient Overwhelmed?: Determining Thresholds for Acceptable Burden of Treatment Using Data From the ComPaRe e-Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the highest burden of treatment beyond which patients with chronic conditions consider their current investments of time and effort in health care unsustainable.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used data collected between January 1, 2017 and October 1, 2018 in the Community of Patients for Research (ComPaRe), an ongoing e-cohort of adult patients with chronic conditions in France. We matched participants' answers to the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) and to a Yes/No anchor question: "Think about all the things you do to care for yourself. Do you think you could continue investing the same amount of time, energy, and money in your health care lifelong?" We defined the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the burden of treatment as the TBQ score below which 75% of patients reported an acceptable burden state.

RESULTS

We analyzed data for 2413 patients (1781 [73.8%] women, 1248 [51.7%] multimorbid, median age: 48 (interquartile range, 36-59] years) enrolled in ComPaRe. Of these, 38% (917 of 2413) reported that they would be unable to continue the same investment of energy, time, and money in health care lifelong. The PASS for the burden of treatment was at 39% of the maximal score (ie, TBQ score = 59/150; 95% CI, 52-64) Using these results, clinicians can detect patients at risk for becoming overwhelmed by their medical care by identifying patients with TBQ scores of 59 or higher.

CONCLUSION

About 40% of patients with chronic conditions report being unable to sustain current investments of energy, time, and money in health care lifelong. The PASS for treatment burden provides a practical yardstick to help clinicians and researchers interpret scores for burden of treatment.

Documentation of hypoglycemia assessment among adults with diabetes during clinical encounters in primary care and endocrinology practices

PURPOSE

To examine the proportion of diabetes-focused clinical encounters in primary care and endocrinology practices where the evaluation for hypoglycemia is documented; and when it is, identify clinicians' stated actions in response to patient-reported events.

METHODS

A total of 470 diabetes-focused encounters among 283 patients nonpregnant adults (≥18 years) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus in this retrospective cohort study. Participants were randomly identified in blocks of treatment strategy and care location (95 and 52 primary care encounters among hypoglycemia-prone medications (i.e. insulin, sulfonylurea) and others patients, respectively; 94 and 42 endocrinology encounters among hypo-treated and others, respectively). Documentation of hypoglycemia and subsequent management plan in the electronic health record were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 132 (46.6%) patients had documentation of hypoglycemia assessment, significantly more prevalent among hypo-treated patients seen in endocrinology than in primary care (72.3% vs. 47.4%; P = 0.001). Hypoglycemia was identified by patient in 38.2% of encounters. Odds of hypoglycemia assessment documentation was highest among the hypo-treated (OR 13.6; 95% CI 5.5-33.74, vs. others) and patients seen in endocrine clinic (OR 4.48; 95% CI 2.3-8.6, vs. primary care). After documentation of hypoglycemia, treatment was modified in 30% primary care and 46% endocrine clinic encounters; P = 0.31. Few patients were referred to diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES).

CONCLUSIONS

Continued efforts to improve hypoglycemia evaluation, documentation, and management are needed, particularly in primary care. This includes not only screening at-risk patients for hypoglycemia, but also modifying their treatment regimens and/or leveraging DSMES.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The effect of the sodium-glucose 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors on microvascular complications remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review to determine the efficacy of the SGLT-2 inhibitors on microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed using Ovid, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to May 2019. Randomized trials comparing SGLT-2 inhibitors with placebo or other medication for type 2 diabetes for ≥ 4 weeks were included. Diabetes-related microvascular complications such as nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, and peripheral vascular disease were evaluated. A random-effect model using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes was used to synthesize data. PROSPERO (CRD 42017076460).

RESULTS

A total of 40 RCTs with overall moderate quality of evidence were included. SGLT-2 inhibitors reduced the risk of renal-replacement therapy (0.65; 95% CI 0.54-0.79), renal death (0.57; 95% CI 0.49-0.65), and progression of albuminuria (0.69; 95% CI 0.66-0.73). Conversely, they appeared ineffective in maintaining eGFR (0.33; 95% CI - 0.74 to 1.41) or reducing serum creatinine (- 0.07; 95% CI - 0.26 to 0.11), whereas urine albumin-creatinine ratio (- 23.4; 95% CI - 44.6 to - 2.2) was reduced. Risk of amputation was non-significant (1.30; 95% CI 0.93-1.83). No available data were found regarding neuropathy and retinopathy to perform a quantitative analysis.

CONCLUSION

SGLT-2 inhibitors may reduce the risk of renal patient-important outcomes but fail to improve surrogate outcomes. Apparently, no increased risk of amputations was observed with these medications. No data were available regarding other microvascular complications.

Foot thermometry with mHeath-based supplementation to prevent diabetic foot ulcers: A randomized controlled trial

Background: Three previous clinical trials have found that thermometry use reduced diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) incidence four- to ten-fold among individuals with diabetes at high-risk of developing a DFU. However, these benefits depend on patient adherence to self-assessment. Therefore, novel approaches to improve self-management thermometry adherence are needed. Our objective was to compare incidence of DFUs in the thermometry plus mobile health (mHealth) reminders intervention arm vs. thermometry-only control arm. Methods: We conducted a randomized trial, enrolling adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus at risk of foot ulcers (risk groups 2 or 3) but without foot ulcers at the time of recruitment and allocating them to control (instruction to use a liquid crystal-based foot thermometer daily) or intervention (same instruction supplemented with text and voice messages with reminders to use the device and messages to promote foot care) groups and followed for 18 months. The primary outcome was time to occurrence of DFU. A process evaluation was also conducted. Results: A total of 172 patients (63% women, mean age 61 years) were enrolled; 86 to each study group. More patients enrolled in the intervention arm had a history of DFU (66% vs. 48%). Follow-up for the primary endpoint was complete for 158 of 172 participants (92%). DFU cumulative incidence was 24% (19 of 79) in the intervention arm and 11% (9 of 79) in the control arm. After adjusting for history of foot ulceration and study site, the Hazard Ratio (HR) for DFU was 1.44 (95% CI 0.65, 3.22). Adherence to ≥80% of daily temperature measurements was 87% (103 of 118) among the study participants who returned the logbook, with no difference between the intervention and control arms. Conclusions: This trial contributes to the evidence about the value of mHealth in preventing diabetes foot ulcers. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02373592 (27/02/2015).

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen in Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure and Do-Not-Intubate or Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen may provide tailored benefits in patients with preset treatment limitations. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of HFNC oxygen in patients with do-not-intubate (DNI) and/or do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of interventional and observational studies. A search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, from inception to October 15, 2018.

RESULTS

We included six studies evaluating 293 patients. All studies had a high risk of bias. The hospital mortality rates of patients with DNI and/or DNR orders receiving HFNC oxygen were variable and ranged from 40% to 87%. In two before and after studies, the initiation of HFNC oxygen was associated with improved oxygenation and reduced respiratory rates. One comparative study found no difference in dyspnea reduction or morphine doses between patients using HFNC oxygen versus conventional oxygen. No studies evaluated quality of life in survivors or quality of death in nonsurvivors. HFNC was generally well tolerated with few adverse events identified.

CONCLUSIONS

While HFNC oxygen remains a viable treatment option for hospitalized patients who have acute respiratory failure and a DNI and/or DNR order, there is a paucity of high-quality, comparative, effectiveness data to guide the usage of HFNC oxygen compared with other treatments, such as noninvasive ventilation, conventional oxygen, and palliative opioids.

Curare Aude-Caring for Patients, with Them

We reflect on Dr. Iserson's article in this journal, in which he suggests that clinicians must "shove" patients towards appropriate care. While recognizing that overt clinical guidance is part of care, we suggest that its use should be tempered by the guidance's responsiveness to the human and emotional experience of each patient.

Adoption of New Glucose-Lowering Medications in the U.S.-The Case of SGLT2 Inhibitors: Nationwide Cohort Study

Background: High-quality diabetes care is evidence-based, timely, and equitable. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are the most recently approved class of glucose-lowering medications with additional cardio- and renal-protective benefits and low risk of hypoglycemia. Cardiovascular and kidney disease are among the most common chronic diabetes complications, whereas hypoglycemia is the most prevalent adverse effect of glucose-lowering therapy. We examine the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with early SGLT2i initiation and appropriateness of use based on contemporaneous scientific evidence. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of medical and pharmacy claims data from OptumLabs® Data Warehouse for commercially insured and Medicare Advantage adult beneficiaries with diabetes types 1 and 2, who filled any glucose-lowering medication between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2016. Demographic (age, sex, race, income), clinical (comorbidities), and insurance-related factors affecting first prescription for a SGLT2i were examined using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 1,054,727 adults with pharmacologically treated diabetes, 7.2% (n = 75,500) initiated a SGLT2i. Patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.96), heart failure (HF) (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.91-0.94), kidney disease (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.78-0.81), and severe hypoglycemia (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98) were all less likely to start a SGLT2i; P < 0.001 for all. SGLT2i were also less likely to be started by patients ≥75 years (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.55-0.59, vs. 18-44 years), Black patients (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.91-0.95, vs. White), and those with Medicare Advantage insurance (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.62-0.64, vs. commercial). Conclusions: Younger, healthier, non-Black patients with commercial health insurance were most likely to start taking SGLT2i. Patients with MI, HF, kidney disease, and prior hypoglycemia were less likely to use SGLT2i, despite evidence supporting their preferential use in these patients. Efforts to address this treatment-risk paradox may help improve health outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes.

What is the effect of a decision aid in potentially vulnerable parents? Insights from the head CT choice randomized trial

Objective

To test the hypotheses that use of the Head CT Choice decision aid would be similarly effective in all parent/patient dyads but parents with high (vs low) numeracy experience a greater increase in knowledge while those with low (vs high) health literacy experience a greater increase in trust.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial conducted at seven sites. One hundred seventy‐two clinicians caring for 971 children at intermediate risk for clinically important traumatic brain injuries were randomized to shared decision making facilitated by the DA (n = 493) or to usual care (n = 478). We assessed for subgroup effects based on patient and parent characteristics, including socioeconomic status (health literacy, numeracy and income). We tested for interactions using regression models with indicators for arm assignment and study site.

Results

The decision aid did not increase knowledge more in parents with high numeracy (P for interaction [P_int] = 0.14) or physician trust more in parents with low health literacy (P_int = 0.34). The decision aid decreased decisional conflict more in non‐white parents (decisional conflict scale, −8.14, 95% CI: −12.33 to −3.95; P_int = 0.05) and increased physician trust more in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents (trust in physician scale, OR: 8.59, 95% CI: 2.35‐14.83; P_int = 0.04).

Conclusions

Use of the Head CT Choice decision aid resulted in less decisional conflict in non‐white parents and greater physician trust in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents. Decision aids may be particularly effective in potentially vulnerable parents.

Do-not-intubate orders in patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the rates and variability of do-not-intubate orders in patients with acute respiratory failure.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of observational studies that enrolled adult patients with acute respiratory failure requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula oxygen from inception to 2019.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies evaluating 10,755 patients were included. The overall pooled rate of do-not-intubate orders was 27%. The pooled rate of do-not-intubate orders in studies from North America was 14% (range 9-22%), from Europe was 28% (range 13-58%), and from Asia was 38% (range 9-83%), p = 0.001. Do-not-intubate rates were higher in studies with higher patient age and in studies where do-not-intubate decisions were made without reported patient/family input. There were no significant differences in do-not-intubate orders according to illness severity, observed mortality, malignancy comorbidity, or methodological quality. Rates of do-not-intubate orders increased over time from 9% in 2000-2004 to 32% in 2015-2019. Only 12 studies (46%) reported information about do-not-intubate decision-making processes. Only 4 studies (15%) also reported rates of do-not-resuscitate.

CONCLUSIONS

One in four patients with acute respiratory failure (who receive noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula oxygen) has a do-not-intubate order. The rate of do-not-intubate orders has increased over time. There is high inter-study variability in do-not-intubate rates-even when accounting for age and illness severity. There is high variability in patient/family involvement in do-not-intubate decision making processes. Few studies reported differences in rates of do-not-resuscitate and do-not-intubate-even though recovery is very different for acute respiratory failure and cardiac arrest.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in 30-Day Hospital Readmissions Among US Adults With Diabetes

IMPORTANCE

Differences in readmission rates among racial and ethnic minorities have been reported, but data among people with diabetes are lacking despite the high burden of diabetes and its complications in these populations.

OBJECTIVES

To examine racial/ethnic differences in all-cause readmission among US adults with diabetes and categorize patient- and system-level factors associated with these differences.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study includes 272 758 adult patients with diabetes, discharged alive from the hospital between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014, and stratified by race/ethnicity. An administrative claims data set of commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries across the United States was used. Data analysis took place between October 2016 and February 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Unplanned all-cause readmission within 30 days of discharge and individual-, clinical-, economic-, index hospitalization-, and hospital-level risk factors for readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 467 324 index hospitalizations among 272 758 adults with diabetes (mean [SD] age, 67.7 [12.7]; 143 498 [52.6%] women) were examined. The rates of 30-day all-cause readmission were 10.2% (33 683 of 329 264) among white individuals, 12.2% (11 014 of 89 989) among black individuals, 10.9% (4151 of 38 137) among Hispanic individuals, and 9.9% (980 of 9934) among Asian individuals (P < .001). After adjustment for all factors, only black patients had a higher risk of readmission compared with white patients (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08). This increased readmission risk among black patients was sequentially attenuated, but not entirely explained, by other demographic factors, comorbidities, income, reason for index hospitalization, or place of hospitalization. Compared with white patients, both black and Hispanic patients had the highest observed-to-expected (OE) readmission rate ratio when their income was low (annual household income <$40 000 among black patients: OE ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.09-1.14; among Hispanic patients: OE ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.16) and when they were hospitalized in nonprofit hospitals (black patients: OE ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.12; among Hispanic patients: OE ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12), academic hospitals (black patients: OE ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.13-1.20; Hispanic patients: OE ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06-1.19), or large hospitals (ie, with ≥400 beds; black patients: OE ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.09-1.14; Hispanic patients: OE ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04-1.14).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, black patients with diabetes had a significantly higher risk of readmission than members of other racial/ethnic groups. This increased risk was most pronounced among lower-income patients hospitalized in nonprofit, academic, or large hospitals. These findings reinforce the importance of identifying and addressing the many reasons for persistent racial/ethnic differences in health care quality and outcomes.

Practice Variation in the Care of Subclinical Hypothyroidism During Pregnancy: A National Survey of Physicians in the United States

Evidence regarding the effects of subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) on adverse pregnancy outcomes and the ability of levothyroxine (LT4) treatment to prevent them is unclear. Available recommendations for the management of SCH during pregnancy are inconsistent. We conducted a nationwide survey among physicians assessing their knowledge of and current practices in the care of SCH in pregnancy and compared these with the most recent American Thyroid Association (ATA) recommendations. In this cross-sectional study, an online survey was sent to active US members of the Endocrine Society. This survey included questions about current practices and clinical scenarios aimed at assessing diagnostic evaluation, initiation of therapy, and follow-up in pregnant women with SCH. In total, 162 physicians completed the survey. ATA guidelines were reviewed by 76%, of whom 53% indicated that these guidelines actually changed their practice. Universal screening was the preferred screening approach (54%), followed by targeted screening (30%). For SCH diagnosis, most respondents (52%) endorsed a TSH level >2.5 mIU/L as a cutoff, whereas 5% endorsed a population-based cutoff as recommended by the ATA. The decision to initiate treatment varied depending on the specific clinical scenario; however, when LT4 was initiated, respondents expected a small/very small reduction in maternofetal complications. In conclusion, despite recently updated guidelines, there is still wide variation in clinical practices regarding the care of women with SCH in pregnancy. Highly reliable randomized trials are required to evaluate the effectiveness of the most uncertain treatment practices on the care of pregnant women with SCH.

Purposeful SDM: A problem-based approach to caring for patients with shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

Patient involvement focused the growth of Shared Decision Making (SDM) in contemporary healthcare practice, research, and education. Whilst important, securing appropriate patient involvement or equipping patients to choose is not necessarily the principal purpose of SDM. The purpose of SDM like all medical decision making is to act well in response to a patient's problem, broadly conceived. In which situations and how SDM addresses patient problems is unclear. We seek to develop a purposeful approach to SDM that is oriented to the kinds of problems that SDM might help resolve.

METHODS

Through vignettes of the experience of a patient, Rachel we demonstrate different kinds of situations in which Rachel, her family, and clinicians need to make decisions together.

RESULTS

Different methods of SDM are needed in situations of: CONCLUSION: SDM may be understood as a range of methods that vary substantially with patients' situations and the purpose that they pursue.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians struggle to adopt SDM when they do not see it as relevant to clinical work. Orienting SDM to the problems that patients and clinicians routinely face may further SDM adoption, education, and research.

Endorsement of reporting guidelines and study registration by endocrine and internal medicine journals: meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVES

To improve the trustworthiness of evidence, studies should be prospectively registered and research reports should adhere to existing standards. We aimed to systematically assess the degree to which endocrinology and internal medicine journals endorse study registration and reporting standards for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs) and observational studies (ObS). Additionally, we evaluated characteristics that predict endorsement of reporting or registration mechanism by these journals.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

SETTING

Journals included in the 'Endocrinology and Metabolism' and 'General and Internal Medicine' 2017 Journal Citation Reports.

PARTICIPANTS

Journals with an impact factor of ≥1.0, focused on clinical medicine, and those who publish RCTs, SRs and ObS were included.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

Requirement of adherence to reporting guideline and study registration as determined from the journals' author instructions.

RESULTS

Of the 170 (82 endocrinology and 88 internal medicine) eligible journals, endorsing of reporting standards was the highest for RCTs, with 35 (43%) of endocrine journals and 55 (63%) of internal medicine journals followed by SRs, with 21 (26%) and 48 (55%), respectively, and lastly, by ObS with 41 (50%) of endocrine journals and 21 (24%) of internal medicine journals. In 78 (46%) journals RCTs were required to be registered and published in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. Only 11 (6%) journals required registration of SRs. Internal medicine journals were more likely to endorse reporting guidelines than endocrine journals except for Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. No other journal characteristic proved to be an independent predictor of reporting standard endorsement for RCTs besides trial registration.

CONCLUSION

Our results highlight that study registration requirement and reporting guideline endorsement are suboptimal in internal medicine and endocrine journals. This malpractice may be further enhanced since endorsement does not imply enforcement, impairing the practice of evidence-based medicine.

Changing conversations in primary care for patients living with chronic conditions: pilot and feasibility study of the ICAN Discussion Aid

PURPOSE

To pilot test the impact of the ICAN Discussion Aid on clinical encounters.

METHODS

A pre-post study involving 11 clinicians and 100 patients was conducted at two primary care clinics within a single health system in the Midwest. The study examined clinicians' perceptions about ICAN feasibility, patients' and clinicians' perceptions about encounter success, videographic differences in encounter topics, and medication adherence 6 months after an ICAN encounter.

RESULTS

39/40 control encounters and 45/60 ICAN encounters yielded usable data. Clinicians reported ICAN use was feasible. In ICAN encounters, patients discussed diet, being active and taking medications more. Clinicians scored themselves poorer regarding visit success than their patients scored them; this effect was more pronounced in ICAN encounters. ICAN did not improve 6-month medication adherence or lengthen visits.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggests that using ICAN in primary care is feasible, efficient and capable of modifying conversations. With lessons learned in this pilot, we are conducting a randomised trial of ICAN versus usual care in diverse clinical settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02390570.

Adaptation and validation of a Spanish version of the treatment burden questionnaire in patients with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

The Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) is a self-reported measure of the effect of treatment workload on patient wellbeing. We sought to validate the TBQ in Spanish and use it to estimate the burden of treatment in Argentinian patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).

METHODS

The TBQ was forward-backward translated into Spanish. Two focus groups and 25 semi-structured interviews focused on wording and possible item exclusion. Validation was performed in 2 steps. First, 162 patients across a range of MS severity completed the questionnaire. Confirmatory factor analysis assessed the dimensional structure of the TBQ. Construct validity was assessed by studying correlations with fatigue and quality of life (QoL). Then, in a second cohort of 171 patients, we evaluated the association between TBQ scores and patients' sex, age, education level, employment status, type of MS, disease duration, comorbidities, EDSS, pharmacological treatment and medication adherence.

RESULTS

The questionnaire presented a 3-factor structure in which burden was related to pharmacological treatment; comprehensive health assistance; and psycho-social-economic context. Composite reliability was > 0.8 for all factors. TBQ showed positive correlation with fatigue (rs = 0.467, p = 0.006), negative correlation with QoL (rs - 0.446, p = 0.009). For the second cohort, total TBQ score was 43 (SD 29). Lowest scores were observed on self-monitoring (0.53, SD 1.3) and highest for administrative load (4.2, SD 3.4). Inverse association was found between the TBQ score and medication adherence (r 0.243 p = 0.001). TBQ scores also correlated with daily patient pill/injection requirements (r 0.175 p = 0.020). Individuals receiving injectable treatment scored higher than patients on oral drugs (total TBQ 51 (SD 32) vs 39 (SD 27) p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The TBQ in Spanish is a reliable instrument and showed adequate correlation with QoL and adherence scales in MS patients. TBQ may benefit health resources allocation and provide tailor therapeutic interventions to construct a minimally disruptive care.