Background and purpose

Heart disease is the leading killer of women and remains poorly recognized in high-risk groups. We assessed baseline knowledge gaps and efficacy of a survey-based educational intervention.

Methods

Four hundred seventy-two women in clinical settings completed pre-/post-surveys for knowledge of: heart disease as the leading killer, risk factors (general and personal levels), heart attack/stroke symptoms, and taking appropriate emergency action. They received a clinic-based educational intervention delivered by healthcare professionals in the course of their clinical care. Change score analyses tested pre-/post-differences in knowledge after the educational intervention, comparing proportions by race, ethnicity, and urban/nonurban status.

Results

Knowledge and awareness was low in all groups, especially for American Indian women (p < 0.05). Awareness was overall highest for heart disease as the leading killer, but it was the lowest for taking appropriate action (13% of Hispanic, 13% of American Indian, 29% of African American, and 18% of nonurban women; p < 0.05). For all women, knowledge of the major risk factors was low (58%) as was knowledge of their personal levels for risk factors (73% awareness for hypertension, 54% for cholesterol, and 50% for diabetes). The intervention was effective (% knowledge gain) in all groups of women, particularly for raising awareness of: (1) heart disease as the leading killer in American Indian (25%), Hispanic (18%), and nonurban (15%) women; (2) taking appropriate action for American Indian (80%), African American (64%), non-Hispanic (55%), and urban (56%) women; (3) heart disease risk factors for Hispanic (56%) and American Indian (47%) women; and (4) heart disease and stroke symptoms in American Indian women (54% and 25%, respectively).

Conclusions

Significant knowledge gaps persist for heart disease in high-risk women, suggesting that these gaps and groups should be targeted by educational programs. We specify areas of need, and we demonstrate efficacy of a clinic-based educational intervention that can be of utility to busy healthcare professionals.

Background

Averaging length of stay (LOS) ignores patient complexity and is a poor metric for quality control in geriatric hip fracture programs. We developed a predictive model of LOS that compares patient complexity to the logistic effects of our institution's hip fracture care pathway.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients enrolled into a hip fracture co-management pathway at an academic level I trauma center from 2014 to 2015. Patient complexity was approximated using the Charlson Comorbidity Index and ASA score. A predictive model of LOS was developed from patient-specific and system-specific variables using a multivariate linear regression analysis; it was tested against a sample of patients from 2016.

Results

LOS averaged 5.95 days. Avoidance of delirium and reduced time to surgery were found to be notable predictors of reduced LOS. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was not a strong predictor of LOS, but the ASA score was. Our predictive LOS model worked well for 63% of patients from the 2016 group; for those it did not work well for, 80% had postoperative complications.

Discussion

Predictive LOS modeling accounting for patient complexity was effective for identifying (1) reasons for outliers to the expected LOS and (2) effective measures to target for improving our hip fracture program.

Level of evidence

III.

Introduction

Over 300,000 patients in the United States sustain low-trauma fragility hip fractures annually. Multidisciplinary geriatric fracture programs (GFP) including early, multimodal pain management reduce morbidity and mortality. Our overall goal was to determine the effects of a GFP on the emergency department (ED) pain management of geriatric fragility hip fractures.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study including patients age ≥65 years with fragility hip fractures two years before and two years after the implementation of the GFP. Outcomes were time to (any) first analgesic, use of acetaminophen and fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) in the ED, and amount of opioid medication administered in the first 24 hours. We used permutation tests to evaluate differences in ED pain management following GFP implementation.

Results

We studied 131 patients in the pre-GFP period and 177 patients in the post-GFP period. In the post-GFP period, more patients received FICB (6% vs. 60%; difference 54%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 45-63%; p<0.001) and acetaminophen (10% vs. 51%; difference 41%, 95% CI 32-51%; p<0.001) in the ED. Patients in the post-GFP period also had a shorter time to first analgesic (103 vs. 93 minutes; p=0.04) and received fewer morphine equivalents in the first 24 hours (15mg vs. 10mg, p<0.001) than patients in the pre-GFP period.

Conclusion

Implementation of a GFP was associated with improved ED pain management for geriatric patients with fragility hip fractures. Future studies should evaluate the effects of these changes in pain management on longer-term outcomes.

Background and objectives

Safety event reporting systems facilitate identification of system-level targets to improve patient safety. Resident physicians report few safety events despite their role as frontline providers and the frequent occurrence of events. The objective of this study is to increase the number of pediatric resident safety event submissions from <1 to 4 submissions per 14-day period within 12 months.

Methods

We conducted an iterative quality improvement process with 39 pediatric residents at a children's hospital. Interventions focused on 4 key drivers: user-friendly event submission process, resident buy-in, nonpunitive safety culture, and data transparency. The primary outcome measure of number of pediatric resident event submissions was analyzed by using statistical process control. Balancing measures included time from submission to feedback, duplicate submissions, and nonevent submissions. As a control, the primary outcome measure was monitored for nonpediatric residents during the same period.

Results

The mean number of pediatric resident event submissions increased from 0.9 to 5.7 submissions per 14 days. Impactful interventions included a designated space in the resident workroom to list safety events to submit, monthly project updates, and an interresident competition. There were no duplicate submissions or nonevent submissions in the postintervention period. Time to feedback in the postintervention period had both upward and downward shifts, with >8 consecutive points above and below the baseline period's centerline. The control group showed no sustained change in event submissions.

Conclusions

Our improvement process was associated with significant increase in pediatric resident safety event submissions without an increase in the number of submissions categorized as duplicates or nonevents.

Objectives

This study sought to examine the relationship between baseline and on-study apolipoproteins (apo) A-1 and B and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels and the development of subsequent cardiovascular (CV) events in the AIM-HIGH (Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome with Low HDL/High Triglyceride and Impact on Global Health Outcomes) trial.

Background

Niacin has been reported to lower apoB and Lp(a) and to raise apoA-1.

Methods

Individuals with CV disease and low baseline levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were randomized to simvastatin plus placebo or simvastatin, plus extended-release niacin ([ERN], 1,500 to 2,000 mg/day), with ezetimibe added as needed, in both groups, to maintain an on-treatment low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the range of 40 to 80 mg/dl. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to evaluate the relationship between levels of apoA-1, apoB, and Lp(a), and CV events in each treatment group.

Results

Baseline apoB and the apoB/apoA-I ratio were significantly predictive of CV events only for the placebo group (HR: 1.17 [p = 0.018] and HR: 1.19 [p = 0.016]). Baseline and on-study Lp(a) were predictive of CV events in both simvastatin plus placebo (baseline HR: 1.24 [p = 0.002] and on-study HR: 1.21 [p = 0.017]) and the simvastatin plus ERN group (baseline HR: 1.25 [p = 0.001] and on-study HR: 1.18 [p = 0.028]). The ERN modestly increased 1-year apoA-1 (7%), decreased apoB (13%), decreased the ApoB/ApoA-1 ratio (19%), and decreased Lp(a) 21%, but did not reduce CV events.

Conclusions

Lp(a) was associated with increased CV risk in both treatment groups indicating that it contributes to residual CV risk. However, there was no evidence that ERN reduced CV risk, despite favorable lipoprotein changes.

Abstract Background Cancer-related pain is common and under-treated. This article describes a study designed to test the effectiveness of a theory-driven, patient-centered coaching intervention to improve cancer pain processes and outcomes. Methods/Design The Cancer Health Empowerment for Living without Pain (Ca-HELP) Study is an American Cancer Society sponsored randomized trial conducted in Sacramento, California. A total of 265 cancer patients with at least moderate pain severity (Worst Pain Numerical Analog Score >=4 out of 10) or pain-related impairment (Likert score >= 3 out of 5) were randomly assigned to receive tailored education and coaching (TEC) or educationally-enhanced usual care (EUC); 258 received at least one follow-up assessment. The TEC intervention is based on social-cognitive theory and consists of 6 components (assess, correct, teach, prepare, rehearse, portray). Both interventions were delivered over approximately 30 minutes just prior to a scheduled oncology visit. The majority of visits (56%) were audio-recorded for later communication coding. Follow-up data including outcomes related to pain severity and impairment, self-efficacy for pain control and for patient-physician communication, functional status and well-being, and anxiety were collected at 2, 6, and 12 weeks. Discussion Building on social cognitive theory and pilot work, this study aims to test the hypothesis that a brief, tailored patient activation intervention will promote better cancer pain care and outcomes. Analyses will focus on the effects of the experimental intervention on pain severity and impairment (primary outcomes); self-efficacy and quality of life (secondary outcomes); and relationships among processes and outcomes of cancer pain care. If this model of coaching by lay health educators proves successful, it could potentially be implemented widely at modest cost. Trial Registration [Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT00283166]

Background: Cancer-related pain is common and under-treated. This article describes a study designed to test the effectiveness of a theory-driven, patient-centered coaching intervention to improve cancer pain processes and outcomes. Methods/Design: The Cancer Health Empowerment for Living without Pain (Ca-HELP) Study is an American Cancer Society sponsored randomized trial conducted in Sacramento, California. A total of 265 cancer patients with at least moderate pain severity (Worst Pain Numerical Analog Score >=4 out of 10) or pain-related impairment (Likert score >= 3 out of 5) were randomly assigned to receive tailored education and coaching (TEC) or educationally-enhanced usual care (EUC); 258 received at least one follow-up assessment. The TEC intervention is based on social-cognitive theory and consists of 6 components (assess, correct, teach, prepare, rehearse, portray). Both interventions were delivered over approximately 30 minutes just prior to a scheduled oncology visit. The majority of visits (56%) were audio-recorded for later communication coding. Follow-up data including outcomes related to pain severity and impairment, self-efficacy for pain control and for patient-physician communication, functional status and well-being, and anxiety were collected at 2, 6, and 12 weeks. Discussion: Building on social cognitive theory and pilot work, this study aims to test the hypothesis that a brief, tailored patient activation intervention will promote better cancer pain care and outcomes. Analyses will focus on the effects of the experimental intervention on pain severity and impairment (primary outcomes); self-efficacy and quality of life (secondary outcomes); and relationships among processes and outcomes of cancer pain care. If this model of coaching by lay health educators proves successful, it could potentially be implemented widely at modest cost. © 2009 Kravitz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Objectives

This study sought to examine the relationship between niacin treatment, lipoproteins, and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in this secondary analysis of the AIM-HIGH (Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome With Low HDL/High Triglycerides and Impact on Global Health Outcomes) trial.

Background

During a 3-year follow-up in 3,414 patients with established CV disease and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels, combined niacin + low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering therapy did not reduce CV events compared with LDL-C-lowering therapy alone.

Methods

Subjects taking simvastatin and/or ezetimibe were randomized to receive extended-release (ER) niacin 1,500 to 2,000 mg or minimal immediate-release niacin (≤ 150 mg) as placebo at bedtime. LDL-C levels in both groups were maintained from 40 to 80 mg/dl. Hazard ratios were estimated by using Cox proportional hazards models for relationships between lipoproteins and the composite endpoint of CV death, myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke, or symptom-driven revascularization.

Results

CV outcomes were not associated with ER niacin in any baseline lipoprotein tertile. In a subset of patients in both the highest triglyceride (≥ 198 mg/dl) and lowest HDL-C (<33 mg/dl) tertiles, ER niacin showed a trend toward benefit (hazard ratio: 0.74, p = 0.073). In-trial LDL-C levels, non-HDL-C levels, and the total cholesterol/HDL-C ratio were positively associated with CV events in the control group, but these relationships were absent in the ER niacin group.

Conclusions

Baseline lipoprotein tertiles did not predict differential benefit or harm with ER niacin added to LDL-C-lowering therapy, but a small dyslipidemic subgroup may benefit. ER niacin attenuated expected relationships of lipoprotein risk factors with CV events, raising the possibility that nonlipoprotein actions of niacin could affect risk. (Niacin Plus Statin to Prevent Vascular Events [AIM-HIGH]; NCT00120289).