Clinical inertia, uncertainty and individualized guidelines

Overcoming Therapeutic Inertia as the Achilles' Heel for Improving Suboptimal Diabetes Care: An Integrative Review

The ultimate purpose of diabetes care is achieving the outcomes that patients regard as important throughout the life course. Despite advances in pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, psychoeducational programs, information technologies, and digital health, the levels of treatment target achievement in people with diabetes mellitus (DM) have remained suboptimal. This clinical care of people with DM is highly challenging, complex, costly, and confounded for patients, physicians, and healthcare systems. One key underlying problem is clinical inertia in general and therapeutic inertia (TI) in particular. TI refers to healthcare providers' failure to modify therapy appropriately when treatment goals are not met. TI therefore relates to the prescribing decisions made by healthcare professionals, such as doctors, nurses, and pharmacists. The known causes of TI include factors at the level of the physician (50%), patient (30%), and health system (20%). Although TI is often multifactorial, the literature suggests that 28% of strategies are targeted at multiple levels of causes, 38% at the patient level, 26% at the healthcare professional level, and only 8% at the healthcare system level. The most effective interventions against TI are shorter intervals until revisit appointments and empowering nurses, diabetes educators, and pharmacists to review treatments and modify prescriptions.

Clinical inertia in rheumatology practice

Several professional medical learned societies and organisations have recommended guidelines for management of various chronic diseases geared to achieve optimal control over the diseases and improve the quality of care. However, the data from around the world suggest that a majority of patients are not achieving those treatment targets. This has been well documented in diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidaemia and rheumatoid arthritis, and clinical inertia is thought to be a major factor responsible. In this article, we have discussed clinical inertia in rheumatology practice, which has relevance to several other chronic non-communicable diseases as well.

Is therapeutic inertia present in hyperglycaemia, hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia management among adults with type 2 diabetes in three health clinics in Malaysia? a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Good-quality evidence has shown that early glycaemic, blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol control in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) leads to better outcomes. In spite of that, diseases control have been inadequate globally, and therapeutic inertia could be one of the main cause. Evidence on therapeutic inertia has been lacking at primary care setting. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the proportions of therapeutic inertia when treatment targets of HbA1c, blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol were not achieved in adults with T2D at three public health clinics in Malaysia.

METHODS

The index prescriptions were those that when the annual blood tests were reviewed. Prescriptions of medication were verified, compared to the preceding prescriptions and classified as 1) no change, 2) stepping up and 3) stepping down. The treatment targets were HbA1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol), blood pressure (BP) < 140/90 mmHg and LDL-cholesterol < 2.6 mmol/L. Therapeutic inertia was defined as no change in the medication use in the present of not reaching the treatment targets. Descriptive, univariable, multivariable logistic regression and sensitive analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 552 cohorts were available for the assessment of therapeutic inertia (78.9% completion rate). The mean (SD) age and diabetes duration were 60.0 (9.9) years and 5.0 (6.0) years, respectively. High therapeutic inertia were observed in oral anti-diabetic (61-72%), anti-hypertensive (34-65%) and lipid-lowering therapies (56-77%), and lesser in insulin (34-52%). Insulin therapeutic inertia was more likely among those with shorter diabetes duration (adjusted OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.87, 0.98). Those who did not achieve treatment targets were less likely to experience therapeutic inertia: HbA1c ≥ 7.0%: adjusted OR 0.10 (0.04, 0.24); BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg: 0.28 (0.16, 0.50); LDL-cholesterol ≥ 2.6 mmol/L: 0.37 (0.22, 0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Although therapeutic intensifications were more likely in the presence of non-achieved treatment targets but the proportions of therapeutic inertia were high. Possible causes of therapeutic inertia were less of the physician behaviours but might be more of patient-related non-adherence or non-availability of the oral medications. These observations require urgent identification and rectification to improve disease control, avoiding detrimental health implications and costly consequences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Number NCT02730754 , April 6, 2016.

Supporting care for suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus in general practice with a clinical decision support system: a mixed methods pilot cluster randomised trial

OBJECTIVES

We developed a complex intervention called DECIDE (ComputeriseD dECisIonal support for suboptimally controlleD typE 2 Diabetes mellitus in Irish General Practice) which used a clinical decision support system to address clinical inertia and support general practitioner (GP) intensification of treatment for adults with suboptimally controlled type2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The current study explored the feasibility and potential impact of DECIDE.

DESIGN

A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Conducted in 14 practices in Irish General Practice.

PARTICIPANTS

The DECIDE intervention was targeted at GPs. They applied DECIDE to patients with suboptimally controlled T2DM, defined as a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥70 mmol/mol and/or blood pressure ≥150/95 mmHg.

INTERVENTION

The intervention incorporated training and a web-based clinical decision support system which supported; (i) medication intensification actions; and (ii) non-pharmacological actions to support care. Control practices delivered usual care.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility and acceptability was determined using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with GPs, combined with data from the DECIDE website. Clinical outcomes included HbA1c, medication intensification, blood pressure and lipids.

RESULTS

We recruited 14 practices and 134 patients. At 4-month follow-up, all practices and 114 patients were followed up. GPs reported finding decision support helpful navigating increasingly complex medication algorithms. However, the majority of GPs believed that the target patient group had poor engagement with GP and hospital services for a range of reasons. At follow-up, there was no difference in glycaemic control (-3.6 mmol/mol (95% CI -11.2 to 4.0)) between intervention and control groups or in secondary outcomes including, blood pressure, total cholesterol, medication intensification or utilisation of services. Continuation criteria supported proceeding to a definitive randomised trial with some modifications.

CONCLUSION

The DECIDE study was feasible and acceptable to GPs but wider impacts on glycaemic and blood pressure control need to be considered for this patient population going forward.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN69498919.

Clinical inertia is the enemy of therapeutic success in the management of diabetes and its complications: a narrative literature review

Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease characterized by high social, economic and health burden, mostly due to the high incidence and morbidity of diabetes complications. Numerous studies have shown that optimizing metabolic control may reduce the risk of micro and macrovascular complications related to the disease, and the algorithms suggest that an appropriate and timely step of care intensification should be proposed after 3 months from the failure to achieve metabolic goals. Nonetheless, many population studies show that glycemic control in diabetic patients is often inadequate. The phenomenon of clinical inertia in diabetology, defined as the failure to start a therapy or its intensification/de-intensification when appropriate, has been studied for almost 20 years, and it is not limited to diabetes care, but also affects other specialties. In the present manuscript, we have documented the issue of inertia in its complexity, assessing its dimensions, its epidemiological weight, and its burden over the effectiveness of care. Our main goal is the identification of the causes of clinical inertia in diabetology, and the quantification of its social and health-related consequences through the adoption of appropriate indicators, in an effort to advance possible solutions and proposals to fight and possibly overcome clinical inertia, thus improving health outcomes and quality of care.

What factors could influence physicians' management of women of childbearing age with chronic inflammatory disease? A systematic review of behavioural determinants of clinical inertia

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy represents a complex challenge to clinicians treating women with chronic inflammatory disease. Many clinicians face a situation of heightened sensitivity to the potential risks and uncertainties associated with the effect of pharmacological treatment on pregnancy outcomes. This may create an environment vulnerable to clinical inertia, whereby behavioural factors such as cognitive heuristics and biases, and other factors such as attitudes to risk and emotion can contribute. This systematic review was undertaken to assess if clinical inertia has been investigated/identified in this setting and took a behavioural science approach to identify and understand the potential determinants of clinical inertia in this treatment setting.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify publications which investigated or described clinical inertia or its determinants (e.g. heuristics, biases etc.). Results were coded for thematic analysis using two inter-related behavioural models: the COM-B model and the Theoretical Domains Framework.

RESULTS

Whilst studies investigating or describing clinical inertia in this treatment setting were not identified, the behavioural analysis revealed a number of barriers to the pharmacological management of women of fertile age affected by chronic inflammatory disease. Factors which may be influencing clinician's behaviour were identified in all domains of the COM-B model. The primary factors identified were a lack of knowledge of treatment guidelines and fears concerning the safety of medications for mother and fetus. Lack of experience of treating pregnant patients was also identified as a contributing factor to undertreatment.

CONCLUSION

Using a behavioural approach, it was possible to identify potential factors which may be negatively influencing clinician's behaviour in this treatment setting, although specific research was limited.

Factors Associated With the Decision-Making on Endovascular Thrombectomy for the Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose—

Little is known about the real-life factors that clinicians use in selection of patients that would receive endovascular treatment (EVT) in the real world. We sought to determine patient, practitioner, and health system factors associated with therapeutic decisions around endovascular treatment.

Methods—

We conducted a multinational cross-sectional web-based study comprising of 607 clinicians and interventionalists from 38 countries who are directly involved in acute stroke care. Participants were randomly allocated to 10 from a pool of 22 acute stroke case scenarios. Each case was classified as either Class I, Class II, or unknown evidence according to the current guidelines. We used logistic regression analysis applying weight of evidence approach. Main outcome measures were multilevel factors associated with EVT, adherence to current EVT guidelines, and practice gaps between current and ideal practice settings.

Results—

Of the 1330 invited participants, 607 (45.6%) participants completed the study (53.7% neurologists, 28.5% neurointerventional radiologists, 17.8% other clinicians). The weighed evidence approach revealed that National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (34.9%), level of evidence (30.2%), ASPECTS (Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score) or ischemic core volume (22.4%), patient’s age (21.6%), and clinicians’ experience in EVT use (19.3%) are the most important factors for EVT decision. Of 2208 responses that met Class I evidence for EVT, 1917 (86.8%) were in favor of EVT. In case scenarios with no available guidelines, 1070 of 1380 (77.5%) responses favored EVT. Comparison between current and ideal practice settings revealed a small practice gap (941 of 6070 responses, 15.5%).

Conclusions—

In this large multinational survey, stroke severity, guideline-based level of evidence, baseline brain imaging, patients’ age and physicians’ experience were the most relevant factors for EVT decision-making. The high agreement between responses and Class I guideline recommendations and high EVT use even when guidelines were not available reflect the real-world acceptance of EVT as standard of care in patients with disabling acute ischemic stroke.

Emotional expressions associated with therapeutic inertia in multiple sclerosis care

BACKGROUND

Emotions play a critical role in our daily decisions. However, it remains unclear how and what sort of emotional expressions are associated with therapeutic decisions in multiple sclerosis (MS) care. Our goal was to evaluate the relationship between emotions and affective states (as captured by muscle facial activity and emotional expressions) and TI amongst neurologists caring for MS patients when making therapeutic decisions.

METHODS

38 neurologists with expertise in MS were invited to participate in a face-to-face study across Canada. Participants answered questions regarding their clinical practice, aversion to ambiguity, and the management of 10 simulated case-scenarios. TI was defined as lack of treatment initiation or escalation when there was clear evidence of clinical and radiological disease activity. We recorded facial muscle activations and their associated emotional expressions during the study, while participants made therapeutic choices. We used a validated machine learning algorithm of the AFFDEX software to code for facial muscle activations and a predefined mapping to emotional expressions (disgust, fear, surprise, etc.). Mixed effects models and mediation analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between ambiguity aversion, facial muscle activity/emotional expressions and TI measured as a binary variable and a continuous score.

RESULTS

34 (89.4%) neurologists completed the study. The mean age [standard deviation (SD)] was 44.6 (11.5) years; 38.3% were female and 58.8% self-identified as MS specialists. Overall, 17 (50%) participants showed TI in at least one case-scenario and the mean (SD) TI score was 0.74 (0.90). Nineteen (55.9%) participants had aversion to ambiguity in the financial domain. The multivariate analysis adjusted for age, sex and MS expertise showed that aversion to ambiguity in the financial domain (OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.32-1.86) was associated with TI. Most common muscle activations included mouth open (23.4%), brow furrow (20.9%), brow raise (17.6%), and eye widening (13.1%). Most common emotional expressions included fear (5.1%), disgust (3.2%), sadness (2.9%), and surprise (2.8%). After adjustment for age, sex, and physicians' expertise, the multivariate analysis revealed that brow furrow (OR 1.04; 95%CI 1.003-1.09) and lip suck (OR 1.06; 95%CI 1.01-1.11) were associated with an increase in TI prevalence, whereas upper lip raise (OR 0.30; 95%CI 0.15-0.59), and chin raise (OR 0.90; 95%CI 0.83-0.98) were associated with lower likelihood of TI. Disgust and surprise were associated with a lower TI score (disgust: p < 0.001; surprise: p = 0.008) and lower prevalence of TI (OR_disgust: 0.14, 95%CI 0.03-0.65; OR_surprise: 0.66, 94%CI 0.47-0.92) after adjusting for covariates. The mediation analysis showed that brow furrow was a partial mediator explaining 21.2% (95%CI 14.9%-38.9%) of the association between aversion to ambiguity and TI score, followed by nose wrinkle 12.8% (95%CI 8.9%-23.4%). Similarly, disgust was the single emotional expression (partial mediator) that attenuated (-13.2%, 95%CI -9.2% to -24.3%) the effect of aversion to ambiguity on TI.

CONCLUSIONS

TI was observed in half of participants in at least one case-scenario. Our data suggest that facial metrics (e.g. brow furrow, nose wrinkle) and emotional expressions (e.g. disgust) are associated with physicians' choices and partially mediate the effect of aversion to ambiguity on TI.

Supporting general practitioner-based care for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (the DECIDE study): feasibility study and protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Control of T2DM can be challenging for healthcare professionals for a number of reasons, including poor concordance with medications, difficulties modifying lifestyle behaviour and also clinical inertia, which is defined as a reluctance among health professionals to intensify medications. A complex intervention, called ComputeriseD dECisIonal support for poorly controlleD typE 2 Diabetes mellitus in Irish General Practice (DECIDE), was developed, identifying T2DM patients with poor glycaemic and blood pressure control and aiming to target clinical inertia, by supporting therapeutic action, including GP-led medication intensification where appropriate. A small-scale, uncontrolled, non-randomised feasibility study highlighted the acceptability of the DECIDE intervention within Irish General Practice. This paper presents a protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the DECIDE intervention.

METHODS/DESIGN

The pilot cluster RCT will involve 14 practices and 140 patients in Irish General Practice. Intervention GPs will participate in the DECIDE intervention, comprising (a) a training programme for the practices and (b) a web-based clinical decision support system supporting treatment escalation, tailored to specific patient information. Only patients who have poorly controlled T2DM (defined as HbA1c > 70 mmol/mol and/or BP > 150/95) will be included. The primary outcomes will include measures of feasibility such as recruitment and retention of practices and acceptability of the intervention and also HbA1c. Secondary outcomes will include medication intensification, blood pressure and lipids. Control GPs will continue to provide usual care. A process evaluation will be performed to determine whether the intervention is delivered as intended and treatment fidelity assessed to monitor and enhance the reliability and validity of interventions. An exploratory health economic analysis will examine the potential costs and cost effectiveness of the intervention relative to the control.

DISCUSSION

A pilot cluster RCT will establish the feasibility of a complex intervention which aims to support primary care for patients with poorly controlled T2DM in Irish General Practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol for the pilot cluster RCT is registered on the ISRCTN Registry at: ISRCTN69498919.

Development of a complex intervention to promote appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus in Irish general practice

BACKGROUND

Poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can be seen as failure to meet recommended targets for management of key risk factors including glycaemic control, blood pressure and lipids. Poor control of risk factors is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Failure to intensify medications for patients with poor control of T2DM when indicated is called clinical inertia and is one contributory factor to poor control of T2DM. We aimed to develop a theory and evidence-based complex intervention to improve appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled T2DM in Irish general practice.

METHODS

The first stage of the Medical Research Council Framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions was utilised. To identify current evidence, we performed a systematic review to examine the effectiveness of interventions targeting patients with poorly controlled T2DM in community settings. The Behaviour Change Wheel theoretical approach was used to identify suitable intervention functions. Workshops, simulation, collaborations with academic partners and observation of physicians were utilised to operationalise the intervention functions and design the elements of the complex intervention.

RESULTS

Our systematic review highlighted that professional-based interventions, potentially through clinical decision support systems, could address poorly controlled T2DM. Appropriate intensification of anti-glycaemic and cardiovascular medications, by general practitioners (GPs), for adults with poorly controlled T2DM was identified as the key behaviour to address clinical inertia. Psychological capability was the key driver of the behaviour, which needed to change, suggesting five key intervention functions (education, training, enablement, environmental restructuring and incentivisation) and nine key behaviour change techniques, which were operationalised into a complex intervention. The intervention has three components: (a) a training program/academic detailing of target GPs, (b) a remote finder tool to help GPs identify patients with poor control of T2DM in their practice and (c) A web-based clinical decision support system.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper describes a multifaceted process including an exploration of current evidence and a thorough theoretical understanding of the predictors of the behaviour resulting in the design of a complex intervention to promote the implementation of evidence-based guidelines, through appropriate prescribing and medication intensification in poorly controlled T2DM.

Clinical inertia and its impact on treatment intensification in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Many people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) fail to achieve glycaemic control promptly after diagnosis and do not receive timely treatment intensification. This may be in part due to 'clinical inertia', defined as the failure of healthcare providers to initiate or intensify therapy when indicated. Physician-, patient- and healthcare-system-related factors all contribute to clinical inertia. However, decisions that appear to be clinical inertia may, in fact, be only 'apparent' clinical inertia and may reflect good clinical practice on behalf of the physician for a specific patient. Delay in treatment intensification can happen at all stages of treatment for people with T2DM, including prescription of lifestyle changes after diagnosis, introduction of pharmacological therapy, use of combination therapy where needed and initiation of insulin. Clinical inertia may contribute to people with T2DM living with suboptimal glycaemic control for many years, with dramatic consequences for the patient in terms of quality of life, morbidity and mortality, and for public health because of the huge costs associated with uncontrolled T2DM. Because multiple factors can lead to clinical inertia, potential solutions most likely require a combination of approaches involving fundamental changes in medical care. These could include the adoption of a person-centred model of care to account for the complex considerations influencing treatment decisions by patients and physicians. Better patient education about the progressive nature of T2DM and the risks inherent in long-term poor glycaemic control may also reinforce the need for regular treatment reviews, with intensification when required.

Decision-making in Multiple Sclerosis: The Role of Aversion to Ambiguity for Therapeutic Inertia among Neurologists (DIScUTIR MS)

Objectives

Limited information is available on physician-related factors influencing therapeutic inertia (TI) in multiple sclerosis (MS). Our aim was to evaluate whether physicians’ risk preferences are associated with TI in MS care, by applying concepts from behavioral economics.

Design

In this cross-sectional study, participants answered questions regarding the management of 20 MS case scenarios, completed 3 surveys, and 4 experimental paradigms based on behavioral economics. Surveys and experiments included standardized measures of aversion ambiguity in financial and health domains, physicians’ reactions to uncertainty in patient care, and questions related to risk preferences in different domains. The primary outcome was TI when physicians faced a need for escalating therapy based on clinical (new relapse) and magnetic resonance imaging activity while patients were on a disease-modifying agent.

Results

Of 161 neurologists who were invited to participate in the project, 136 cooperated with the study (cooperation rate 84.5%) and 96 completed the survey (response rate: 60%). TI was present in 68.8% of participants. Similar results were observed for definitions of TI based on modified Rio or clinical progression. Aversion to ambiguity was associated with higher prevalence of TI (86.4% with high aversion to ambiguity vs. 63.5% with lower or no aversion to ambiguity; p = 0.042). In multivariate analyses, high aversion to ambiguity was the strongest predictor of TI (OR 7.39; 95%CI 1.40–38.9), followed by low tolerance to uncertainty (OR 3.47; 95%CI 1.18–10.2).

Conclusion

TI is a common phenomenon affecting nearly 7 out of 10 physicians caring for MS patients. Higher prevalence of TI was associated with physician’s strong aversion to ambiguity and low tolerance of uncertainty.

Bringing patient centricity to diabetes medication access in Canada

Canada must become proactive in addressing type 2 diabetes. With the second highest rate of diabetes prevalence in the developed world, the number of Canadians living with diabetes will soon reach epidemic levels. Against international comparisons, Canada also performs poorly with respect to diabetes-related hospitalizations, mortality rates, and access to medications. Diabetes and its comorbidities pose a significant burden on people with diabetes (PWD) and their families, through out-of-pocket expenses for medications, devices, supplies, and the support needed to manage their illness. Rising direct and indirect costs of diabetes will become a drain on Canada's economy and undermine the financial stability of our health care system. Canada's approach to diabetes medication assessment and funding has created a patchwork of medication access across provinces. Access to treatments for those who rely on public programs is highly restricted compared to Canadians with private drug plans, as well in contrast with public payers in other countries. Each person living with diabetes has different needs, so a "patient-centric" approach ensures treatment focused on individual circumstances. Such tailoring is difficult to achieve, with the linear approach required by public payers. We may be undermining optimal care for PWD because of access policies that are not aligned with individualized approaches - and increasing overall health care costs in the process. The scope of Canada's diabetes challenge demands holistic and proactive solutions. Canada needs to get out from "behind the eight ball" and get "ahead of the curve" when it comes to diabetes care. Improving access to medications is one of the tools for getting there. Canada's "call to action" for diabetes starts with effective implementation of existing best practices. A personalized approach to medication access, to meet individual needs and optimize outcomes, is also a key enabler. PWD and prescribers need reimbursement approaches that allow them to use existing tools (ie, medications and supplies) to manage diabetes in a timely manner and to avoid and/or delay major downstream complications.

Decision making under uncertainty, therapeutic inertia, and physicians' risk preferences in the management of multiple sclerosis (DIScUTIR MS)

BACKGROUND

The management of multiple sclerosis (MS) is rapidly changing by the introduction of new and more effective disease-modifying agents. The importance of risk stratification was confirmed by results on disease progression predicted by different risk score systems. Despite these advances, we know very little about medical decisions under uncertainty in the management of MS. The goal of this study is to i) identify whether overconfidence, tolerance to risk/uncertainty, herding influence medical decisions, and ii) to evaluate the frequency of therapeutic inertia (defined as lack of treatment initiation or intensification in patients not at goals of care) and its predisposing factors in the management of MS.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a prospective study comprising a combination of case-vignettes and surveys and experiments from Neuroeconomics/behavioral economics to identify cognitive distortions associated with medical decisions and therapeutic inertia. Participants include MS fellows and MS experts from across Spain. Each participant will receive an individual link using Qualtrics platform(©) that includes 20 case-vignettes, 3 surveys, and 4 behavioral experiments. The total time for completing the study is approximately 30-35 min. Case vignettes were selected to be representative of common clinical encounters in MS practice. Surveys and experiments include standardized test to measure overconfidence, aversion to risk and ambiguity, herding (following colleague's suggestions even when not supported by the evidence), physicians' reactions to uncertainty, and questions from the Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) related to risk preferences in different domains. By applying three different MS score criteria (modified Rio, EMA, Prosperini's scheme) we take into account physicians' differences in escalating therapy when evaluating medical decisions across case-vignettes.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study applies an innovative approach by combining tools to assess medical decisions with experiments from Neuroeconomics that applies to common scenarios in MS care. Our results will help advance the field by providing a better understanding on the influence of cognitive factors (e.g., overconfidence, aversion to risk and uncertainty, herding) on medical decisions and therapeutic inertia in the management of MS which could lead to better outcomes.

Simplistic and complex thought in medicine: the rationale for a person-centered care model as a medical revolution

According to the concept developed by Thomas Kuhn, a scientific revolution occurs when scientists encounter a crisis due to the observation of anomalies that cannot be explained by the generally accepted paradigm within which scientific progress has thereto been made: a scientific revolution can therefore be described as a change in paradigm aimed at solving a crisis. Described herein is an application of this concept to the medical realm, starting from the reflection that during the past decades, the medical community has encountered two anomalies that, by their frequency and consequences, represent a crisis in the system, as they deeply jeopardize the efficiency of care: nonadherence of patients who do not follow the prescriptions of their doctors, and clinical inertia of doctors who do not comply with good practice guidelines. It is proposed that these phenomena are caused by a contrast between, on the one hand, the complex thought of patients and doctors that sometimes escapes rationalization, and on the other hand, the simplification imposed by the current paradigm of medicine dominated by the technical rationality of evidence-based medicine. It is suggested therefore that this crisis must provoke a change in paradigm, inventing a new model of care defined by an ability to take again into account, on an individual basis, the complex thought of patients and doctors. If this overall analysis is correct, such a person-centered care model should represent a solution to the two problems of patients' nonadherence and doctors' clinical inertia, as it tackles their cause. These considerations may have important implications for the teaching and the practice of medicine.

How much is too much? Outcomes in patients using high-dose insulin glargine

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not achieve glycaemic control targets on basal insulin regimens. This analysis investigated characteristics, clinical outcomes and impact of concomitant oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) in patients with T2DM treated with high-dose insulin glargine.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from 15 randomised, treat-to-target trials in patients with T2DM treated with insulin glargine ± OADs for ≥ 24 weeks. Data were stratified according to whether patients exceeded three insulin dose cut-off levels (> 0.5, > 0.7 and > 1.0 IU/kg). End-points included glycated haemoglobin A1c (A1C), fasting plasma glucose, body weight, and overall, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

Data from 2837 insulin-naïve patients were analysed. Patients with insulin titrated beyond the three doses investigated had significantly higher baseline A1C levels and were younger, with shorter diabetes duration than those at/below cut-offs (p < 0.05 for all cut-offs); they also had greater weight gain (p < 0.001 for the > 0.5 and > 0.7 IU/kg cut-offs) than those who did not exceed the cut-offs, regardless of concomitant OAD. Patients on concomitant metformin alone had higher insulin doses at Week 24, but achieved greater reductions in A1C, less weight gain and lower hypoglycaemia rates than patients on a concomitant sulfonylurea or metformin plus a sulfonylurea, regardless of whether cut-offs were exceeded.

CONCLUSION

In patients with T2DM, increasing basal insulin doses above 0.5 IU/kg may not improve glycaemic control; treatment strategies targeting postprandial glucose control should be considered for such patients.

[The use of the new direct oral anticoagulants among older subjects: The limits of the evidence-based medicine?]

The growing use of direct oral anticoagulants, in particular among older subjects, raises questions about the limits of the evidence-based medicine. The phase III studies that have validated the efficacy and the safety profile of these molecules (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) in their both indications, the venous thromboembolic disease and the non-valvular atrial fibrillation raise concerns in four major fields: the financial support of pharmaceutical companies, the links of interest for many authors with the industry, the study design (exclusively non-inferiority studies), and the poor representativeness of the older subjects included. All these points are discussed, using data of sub-groups studies, post-marketing studies and recent meta-analysis. The lack of data for the very old subjects, with frailty or comorbidities, remains the main concern from these phase III studies.

Conveying Uncertainty in Prognosis to Patients with ESRD

Background: Prognosis is a component of medical practice imbued with uncertainty. In nephrology, where mortality rates of elderly patients on dialysis are comparable to those of cancer patients, the implications of prognosis are unavoidable. Yet while most patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) desire to hear their prognosis, many nephrologists balk at this prospect in part owing to the uncertainty inherent in prognostic estimates. Summary: In this review, the concept of ‘uncertainty' in clinical practice is considered from physician and patient perspectives. From the training perspective, providers learn that uncertainty is inescapable in medicine and develop strategies to manage its presence, including the avoidance of communicating uncertainty to their patients. This presages infrequent discussions of prognosis, which in turn influence patient preferences for treatments that have little therapeutic benefits. A general approach to conveying prognostic uncertainty to ESRD patients includes confronting our own emotional reaction to uncertainty, learning how to effectively communicate uncertainty to our patients, and using an effective interdisciplinary team approach to demonstrate an ongoing commitment to our patients despite the presence of prognostic uncertainty. Key Messages: Uncertainty in prognosis is inevitable. Once providers learn to incorporate it into their discussions of prognosis and collaborate with their ESRD patients, such discussions can foster trust and reduce anxiety for both sides.