Think-aloud study about the diagnosis of chronic heart failure in Belgian general practice

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes: Barriers and solutions for improving uptake in routine clinical practice

Recent advances in type 2 diabetes (T2D) research have highlighted the benefits of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, including cardiovascular and renal protection. However, uptake rates of these drugs remain low in patients with T2D, particularly in subpopulations most likely to benefit from them. This review considers the potential barriers to prescribing SGLT-2 inhibitors in T2D in clinical practice and outlines potential multidisciplinary recommendations to overcome these barriers. Safety concerns and a lack of clarity in and divergence of guidelines around the introduction of SGLT-2 inhibitors into treatment regimens may represent a barrier to uptake from the clinicians' perspective, including a general lack of understanding of the benefits associated with SGLT-2 inhibitors. Patient characteristics, such as socioeconomic status, may influence uptake because of the cost of SGLT-2 inhibitors, especially in the United States, where health insurance coverage could be a concern. SGLT-2 inhibitor prescription rates vary between clinical specialty (endocrinology, primary care, cardiology, and nephrology) and country, with cardiologists the lowest prescribers, and endocrinologists the highest. Primary care practitioners may experience more challenges in following SGLT-2 inhibitor-related guidelines than diabetes specialists as there may be fewer opportunities for education on how this drug class improves cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with T2D. Uptake rates appear to vary between countries because of differences in guidelines and health insurance systems. The amendment of SGLT-2 inhibitor-related guidelines for more multidisciplinary use and the implementation of patient and clinician education may encourage uptake of these drugs, potentially improving long-term health outcomes among patients with T2D.

Age and gender differences in diagnostic decision-making of early heart failure: results of a mixed-methods interview-study using video vignettes

OBJECTIVES

Men and women at any age show similar symptoms and signs of heart failure (HF). Since early HF symptoms are ambiguous, doctors may overlook HF as possible cause and misinterpret the signs. The aim was to analyse differences in general practitioners' (GPs) HF diagnosis and diagnostic certainty by patient age and gender and to identify reasons for possible differences.

DESIGN

Factorial design with video vignettes presenting patients (played by professional actors) with early HF symptoms was used. Video vignettes differed regarding patients' gender (male/female), age (55 years/75 years) and migration background (no/yes: Turkish), while the dialogue was identical. GPs were asked about possible diagnoses and certainty of diagnoses (quantitative) and to narrate their thoughts on considered diagnoses (qualitative).

SETTING

General practices in northern Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

128 GPs stratified by gender and length of clinical experience (≤15 years or >15 years).

RESULTS

GPs considered HF more often in women than men (predicted probabilities with 95% CI: 0.83 (0.68 to 0.92) vs 0.63 (0.44 to 0.79), p=0.02), especially in older women compared with younger men (predicted probabilities with 95% CI: 0.89 (0.68 to 0.96) vs 0.52 (0.31 to 0.72), p=0,03). Suspected HF was not reasoned by the patient's gender and only seldom by the patient's age, but by reported symptoms. Diagnostic certainty of HF was higher in women than in men (predicted proportions with 95% CI: 0.48 (0.39 to 0.58) vs 0.36 (0.27 to 0.45), p=0.01), with highest certainty in older women and lowest in younger men (0.57 (0.45 to 0.69) vs 0.27 (0.17 to 0.37), p<0.01). GPs explained their certainty referring to both typical HF symptoms and their gut feeling.

CONCLUSION

Despite an identical dialogue, the study showed differences by patients' gender and age in frequency and certainty of HF diagnosis. In order to avoid that GPs overlook or misinterpret early signs of HF, it is important to critically reflect diagnostic decisions and possible social influences.

Diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of heart failure patients by general practitioners: A Delphi consensus statement

Aims

Creation of an algorithm that includes the most important parameters (history, clinical parameters, and anamnesis) that can be linked to heart failure, helping general practitioners in recognizing heart failure in an early stage and in a better follow-up of the patients.

Methods and results

The algorithm was created using a consensus-based Delphi panel technique with fifteen general practitioners and seven cardiologists from Belgium. The method comprises three iterations with general statements on diagnosis, referral and treatment, and follow-up. Consensus was obtained for the majority of statements related to diagnosis, referral, and follow-up, whereas a lack of consensus was seen for treatment statements. Based on the statements with good and perfect consensus, an algorithm for general practitioners was assembled, helping them in diagnoses and follow-up of heart failure patients. The diagnosis should be based on three essential pillars, i.e. medical history, anamnesis and clinical examination. In case of suspected heart failure, blood analysis, including the measurement of NT-proBNP levels, can already be performed by the general practitioner followed by referral to the cardiologist who is then responsible for proper diagnosis and initiation of treatment. Afterwards, a multidisciplinary health care process between the cardiologist and the general practitioner is crucial with an important role for the general practitioner who has a key role in the up-titration of heart failure medication, down-titration of the dose of diuretics and to assure drug compliance.

Conclusions

Based on the consensus levels of statements in a Delphi panel setting, an algorithm is created to help general practitioners in the diagnosis and follow-up of heart failure patients.

A think-aloud study to inform the design of radiograph interpretation practice

Models for diagnostic reasoning in radiology have been based on the observed behaviors of experienced radiologists but have not directly focused on the thought processes of novices as they improve their accuracy of image interpretation. By collecting think-aloud verbal reports, the current study was designed to investigate differences in specific thought processes between medical students (novices) as they learn and radiologists (experts), so that we can better design future instructional environments. Seven medical students and four physicians with radiology training were asked to interpret and diagnose pediatric elbow radiographs where fracture is suspected. After reporting their diagnosis of a case, they were given immediate feedback. Participants were asked to verbalize their thoughts while completing the diagnosis and while they reflected on the provided feedback. The protocol analysis of their verbalizations showed that participants used some combination of four processes to interpret the case: gestalt interpretation, purposeful search, rule application, and reasoning from a prior case. All types of processes except reasoning from a prior case were applied significantly more frequently by experts. Further, gestalt interpretation was used with higher frequency in abnormal cases while purposeful search was used more often for normal cases. Our assessment of processes could help guide the design of instructional environments with well-curated image banks and analytics to facilitate the novice's journey to expertise in image interpretation.

Impact of an extended audit on identifying heart failure patients in general practice: baseline results of the OSCAR-HF pilot study

Aims

Identifying heart failure (HF) patients in general practice is challenging, and little is known about the current quality of care. We implemented an extended audit from the electronic health records (EHRs) of general practitioners (GPs) to identify HF patients and investigate patient characteristics and quality of care.

Methods and results

This study describes the baseline results of the OSCAR‐HF pilot study in eight general practices (51 GPs) in Flanders, Belgium. This prospective trial ran for 6 months. Interventions included an extended audit, an N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide point‐of‐care test, and assistance of a specialist HF nurse. The extended audit searched on risk factors for HF, HF symptoms, signs, and medication in the GPs' EHR to generate a list of possible HF patients. GPs determined which patients had HF. Those HF patients constituted the OSCAR‐HF study population. Each patient file was manually revised to extract biomarker measurements, echocardiography data, and quality indicators. An independent panel of experts assessed the validity of GPs' HF diagnoses. Feedback about the validity of the HF diagnosis was given to the GP. Out of 18 011 patients ≥ 40 years, we identified 310 patients with a registered HF diagnosis before the study start (HF prevalence: 1.7%). The extended audit led to a 74% increase in identified HF patients (n = 538, HF prevalence: 3.0%) with a mean age of 79 ± 11 years. The prevalence of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was 20% (n = 110). A high proportion of patients underwent echocardiography in the past 5 years (86%, n = 462). Natriuretic peptides were rarely available in patients' files (19%, n = 100). Medical specialists should improve communication about the HF diagnosis because a specialist diagnosis was present in only 225 patients (42%) while 67% (n = 359) of the HF diagnoses were judged objectified by a panel of experts. Assigning a diagnosis of HF was particularly difficult in HF patients with preserved EF (HFpEF). HFrEF treatment rates with renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system blockers (84%, n = 92) and beta‐blockers (86%, n = 94) were very good; however, target doses were hardly reached (34% and 14%, respectively).

Conclusions

This study highlighted the need to improve case finding for HF in general practice and showed that an extended audit in the GPs' EHR was a successful strategy to do so. To improve the quality of HF care in general practice, specific strategies are needed to diagnose HFpEF and to reach target doses of disease‐modifying drugs in HFrEF patients.