Maihan B. Vu

The Harms of Screening: A Proposed Taxonomy and Application to Lung Cancer Screening

IMPORTANCE Making rational decisions about screening requires information about its harms, but high-quality evidence is often either not available or not used. One reason may be that we lack a coherent framework, a taxonomy, for conceptualizing and studying these harms. OBJECTIVE To create a taxonomy, we categorized harms from several sources: systematic reviews of screening, other published literature, and informal discussions with clinicians and patients. We used this information to develop an initial taxonomy and vetted it with local and national experts, making revisions as needed. RESULTS We propose a taxonomy with 4 domains of harm from screening: physical effects, psychological effects, financial strain, and opportunity costs. Harms can occur at any step of the screening cascade. We provide definitions for each harm domain and illustrate the taxonomy using the example of screening for lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The taxonomy provides a systematic way to conceptualize harms as experienced by patients. As shown in the lung cancer screening example, the taxonomy also makes clear where (which domains of harms and which parts of the screening cascade) we have useful information and where there are gaps in our knowledge. The taxonomy needs further testing and validation across a broad range of screening programs. We hope that further development of this taxonomy can improve our thinking about the harms of screening, thus informing our research, policy making, and decision making with patients about the wisdom of screening.

A failure to communicate: a qualitative exploration of care coordination between hospitalists and primary care providers around patient hospitalizations.

BackgroundCare coordination between adult hospitalists and primary care providers (PCPs) is a critical component of successful transitions of care from hospital to home, yet one that is not well understood.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to understand the challenges in coordination of care, as well as potential solutions, from the perspective of hospitalists and PCPs in North Carolina.Design and ParticipantsWe conducted an exploratory qualitative study with 58 clinicians in four hospitalist focus groups (n = 32), three PCP focus groups (n = 19), and one hybrid group with both hospitalists and PCPs (n = 7).ApproachInterview guides included questions about care coordination, information exchange, follow-up care, accountability, and medication management. Focus group sessions were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed in ATLAS.ti. The constant comparative method was used to evaluate differences between hospitalists and PCPs.Key ResultsHospitalists and PCPs were found to encounter similar care coordination challenges, including (1) lack of time, (2) difficulty reaching other clinicians, (3) lack of personal relationships with other clinicians, (4) lack of information feedback loops, (5) medication list discrepancies, and (6) lack of clarity regarding accountability for pending tests and home health. Hospitalists additionally noted difficulty obtaining timely follow-up appointments for after-hours or weekend discharges. PCPs additionally noted (1) not knowing when patients were hospitalized, (2) not having hospital records for post-hospitalization appointments, (3) difficulty locating important information in discharge summaries, and (4) feeling undervalued when hospitalists made medication changes without involving PCPs. Hospitalists and PCPs identified common themes of successful care coordination as (1) greater efforts to coordinate care for “high-risk” patients, (2) improved direct telephone access to each other, (3) improved information exchange through shared electronic medical records, (4) enhanced interpersonal relationships, and (5) clearly defined accountability.ConclusionsHospitalists and PCPs encounter similar challenges in care coordination, yet have important experiential differences related to sending and receiving roles for hospital discharges. Efforts to improve coordination of care between hospitalists and PCPs should aim to understand perspectives of clinicians in each setting.

A Comparison of Live Counseling With a Web-Based Lifestyle and Medication Intervention to Reduce Coronary Heart Disease Risk A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Most primary care clinicians lack the skills and resources to offer effective lifestyle and medication (L&M) counseling to reduce coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. Thus, effective and feasible CHD prevention programs are needed for typical practice settings. OBJECTIVE To assess the effectiveness, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness of a combined L&M intervention to reduce CHD risk offered in counselor-delivered and web-based formats. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A comparative effectiveness trial in 5 diverse family medicine practices in North Carolina. Participants were established patients, aged 35 to 79 years, with no known cardiovascular disease, and at moderate to high risk for CHD (10-year Framingham Risk Score [FRS], ≥10%). INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to counselor-delivered or web-based format, each including 4 intensive and 3 maintenance sessions. After randomization, both formats used a web-based decision aid showing potential CHD risk reduction associated with L&M risk-reducing strategies. Participants chose the risk-reducing strategies they wished to follow. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was within-group change in FRS at 4-month follow-up. Other measures included standardized assessments of blood pressure, blood lipid levels, lifestyle behaviors, and medication adherence. Acceptability and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. Outcomes were assessed at 4 and 12 months. RESULTS Of 2274 screened patients, 385 were randomized (192 counselor; 193 web): mean age, 62 years; 24% African American; and mean FRS, 16.9%. Follow-up at 4 and 12 months included 91% and 87% of the randomized participants, respectively. There was a sustained reduction in FRS at both 4 months (primary outcome) and 12 months for both counselor-based (-2.3% [95% CI, -3.0% to -1.6%] and -1.9% [95% CI, -2.8% to -1.1%], respectively) and web-based groups (-1.5% [95% CI, -2.2% to -0.9%] and -1.7% [95% CI, -2.6% to -0.8%] respectively). At 4 months, the adjusted difference in FRS between groups was -1.0% (95% CI, -1.8% to -0.1%) (P = .03), and at 12 months, it was -0.6% (95% CI, -1.7% to 0.5%) (P = .30). The 12-month costs from the payer perspective were

Glucose Self-monitoring in Non–Insulin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care Settings: A Randomized Trial

207 and

Designing and implementing a comparative effectiveness study of two strategies for delivering high quality CHD prevention: Methods and participant characteristics for the Heart to Health study

110 per person for the counselor- and web-based interventions, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Both intervention formats reduced CHD risk through 12-month follow-up. The web format was less expensive. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01245686.

Individuals’ responses to global CHD risk: A focus group study

Importance The value of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) levels in patients with non–insulin-treated type 2 diabetes has been debated. Objective To compare 3 approaches of SMBG for effects on hemoglobin A1c levels and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among people with non–insulin-treated type 2 diabetes in primary care practice. Design, Setting, and Participants The Monitor Trial study was a pragmatic, open-label randomized trial conducted in 15 primary care practices in central North Carolina. Participants were randomized between January 2014 and July 2015. Eligible patients with type 2 non–insulin-treated diabetes were: older than 30 years, established with a primary care physician at a participating practice, had glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c) levels higher than 6.5% but lower than 9.5% within the 6 months preceding screening, as obtained from the electronic medical record, and willing to comply with the results of random assignment into a study group. Of the 1032 assessed for eligibility, 450 were randomized. Interventions No SMBG, once-daily SMBG, and once-daily SMBG with enhanced patient feedback including automatic tailored messages delivered via the meter. Main Outcomes and Measures Coprimary outcomes included hemoglobin A1c levels and HRQOL at 52 weeks. Results A total of 450 patients were randomized and 418 (92.9%) completed the final visit. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin A1c levels across all 3 groups (P = .74; estimated adjusted mean hemoglobin A1c difference, SMBG with messaging vs no SMBG, −0.09%; 95% CI, −0.31% to 0.14%; SMBG vs no SMBG, −0.05%; 95% CI, −0.27% to 0.17%). There were also no significant differences found in HRQOL. There were no notable differences in key adverse events including hypoglycemia frequency, health care utilization, or insulin initiation. Conclusions and Relevance In patients with non–insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, we observed no clinically or statistically significant differences at 1 year in glycemic control or HRQOL between patients who performed SMBG compared with those who did not perform SMBG. The addition of this type of tailored feedback provided through messaging via a meter did not provide any advantage in glycemic control. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02033499

Using Community-Based Participatory Research Principles to Develop More Understandable Recruitment and Informed Consent Documents in Genomic Research

BACKGROUND Although lifestyle and medications are effective for coronary heart disease (CHD) risk reduction, few studies have examined the comparative effectiveness of various strategies for delivering high quality CHD risk reduction. In this paper, we report on the design and baseline characteristics of participants for just such a trial. METHODS We conducted a randomized trial of the same lifestyle and medication intervention delivered in two alternate formats: counselor-delivered or web-based. The trial was conducted at 5 diverse practices in a family medicine research network and included men and women age 35-79 who were at high risk of CHD events based on 10-year predicted Framingham risk of ≥10% or a known history of cardiovascular disease. After individual-level randomization, participants in both arms received a decision aid plus four intensive intervention visits and 3 maintenance visits over 12 months. The primary outcome was change in 10-year predicted CHD risk among patients without prior cardiovascular disease. Secondary outcomes, measured among all participants, included changes in CHD risk factors, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability at 4 and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS We randomized 489 eligible patients: 389 without and 100 with a known history of cardiovascular disease. Mean age was 62.3. 75% were white, 25% African-American. 45% had a college education. 88% had health insurance. Mean 10-year predicted CHD risk was 16.9%. CONCLUSION We have successfully recruited a diverse sample of practices and patients that will provide a rich sample in which to test the comparative effectiveness of two strategies to implement high quality CHD prevention.

Patient and Practice Perspectives on Strategies for Controlling Blood Pressure, North Carolina, 2010–2012

OBJECTIVE To explore how individuals respond to global coronary heart disease (CHD) risk and use it in combination with treatment information to make decisions to initiate and maintain risk reducing strategies. METHODS We conducted four focus groups of individuals at risk for CHD (n=29), purposively sampling individuals with each of several risk factors. Two reviewers coded verbatim transcripts and arbitrated differences, using ATLAS.ti 5.2 to facilitate analysis. RESULTS Participants generally regarded the concept of global CHD risk as useful and motivating, although had questions about its precision and comprehensiveness. They identified several additional influential factors in decision-making (e.g. achievable risk, the quickness and self-evidence of results) and generally preferred lifestyle changes to medications (although most would accept medications under certain circumstances). They also noted the importance of participating in decision-making. CONCLUSION Our results underscore the motivating potential of global CHD risk and the importance of patient participation in decision-making. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Global CHD risk is a useful adjunct to CHD prevention and can be presented in ways, and with information, that might improve CHD outcomes.

Latino caregiver's insight into childhood overweight management and relationships with their health care providers

Background Heart Healthy Lenoir is a transdisciplinary project aimed at creating long-term, sustainable approaches to reduce cardiovascular disease risk disparities in Lenoir County, North Carolina using a design spanning genomic analysis and clinical intervention. We hypothesized that residents of Lenoir County would be unfamiliar and mistrustful of genomic research, and therefore reluctant to participate; additionally, these feelings would be higher in African-Americans. Methodology To test our hypothesis, we conducted qualitative research using community-based participatory research principles to ensure our genomic research strategies addressed the needs, priorities, and concerns of the community. African-American (n = 19) and White (n = 16) adults in Lenoir County participated in four focus groups exploring perceptions about genomics and cardiovascular disease. Demographic surveys were administered and a semi-structured interview guide was used to facilitate discussions. The discussions were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed in ATLAS.ti. Results and Significance From our analysis, key themes emerged: transparent communication, privacy, participation incentives and barriers, knowledge, and the impact of knowing. African-Americans were more concerned about privacy and community impact compared to Whites, however, African-Americans were still eager to participate in our genomic research project. The results from our formative study were used to improve the informed consent and recruitment processes by: 1) reducing misconceptions of genomic studies; and 2) helping to foster participant understanding and trust with the researchers. Our study demonstrates how community-based participatory research principles can be used to gain deeper insight into the community and increase participation in genomic research studies. Due in part to these efforts 80.3% of eligible African-American participants and 86.9% of eligible White participants enrolled in the Heart Healthy Lenoir Genomics study making our overall enrollment 57.8% African-American. Future research will investigate return of genomic results in the Lenoir community.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of a problem-solving intervention addressing barriers to cardiovascular disease prevention behaviors in 3 underserved populations: Colorado, North Carolina, West Virginia, 2009.

Introduction Patient and practice perspectives can inform development of team-based approaches to improving blood pressure control in primary care. We used a community-based participatory research approach to assess patient and practice perceptions regarding the value of team-based strategies for controlling blood pressure in a rural North Carolina population from 2010 through 2012. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted with 41 adults with hypertension, purposely sampled to include diversity of sex, race, literacy, and blood pressure control, and with key office staff at 5 rural primary care practices in the southeastern US “stroke belt.” Interviews explored barriers to controlling blood pressure, the practice’s role in controlling blood pressure, and opinions on the use of team care delivery. Results Patients reported that provider strategies to optimize blood pressure control should include regular visits, medication adjustment, side-effect discussion, and behavioral counseling. When discussing team-based approaches to hypertension care, patients valued verbal encouragement, calls from the doctor’s office, and the opportunity to ask questions. However, they voiced concerns about the effect of having too many people involved in their care. Practice staff focused on multiple, broad methods to control blood pressure including counseling, regular office visits, media to improve awareness, and support groups. An explicit focus of delivering care as teams was a newer concept. Conclusion When developing a team approach to hypertension treatment, patients value high-quality communication and not losing their primary relationship with their provider. Practice staff members were open to a team-based approach but had limited knowledge of what such an approach would entail.