Lindsey A Laytner, Barbara W Trautner, Susan Nash, Roger Zoorob, Jennifer O Okoh, Eva Amenta, Kiara Olmeda, Juanita Salinas, Michael K Paasche-Orlow, Larissa Grigoryan
Patient expectations of receiving antibiotics for common symptoms can trigger unnecessary use. We conducted a survey (n = 564) between January 2020 to June 2021 in public and private primary care clinics in Texas to study the prevalence and predictors of patients' antibiotic expectations for common symptoms/illnesses. We surveyed Black patients (33%) and Hispanic/Latine patients (47%), and over 93% expected to receive an antibiotic for at least 1 of the 5 pre-defined symptoms/illnesses. Public clinic patients were nearly twice as likely to expect antibiotics for sore throat, diarrhea, and cold/flu than private clinic patients. Lack of knowledge of potential risks of antibiotic use was associated with increased antibiotic expectations for diarrhea (odds ratio [OR] = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4) and cold/flu symptoms (OR = 2.9; 95% CI, 2.0-4.4). Lower education and inadequate health literacy were predictors of antibiotic expectations for diarrhea. Future antibiotic stewardship interventions should tailor patient education materials to include information on antibiotic risks and guidance on appropriate antibiotic indications.
{"title":"Lack of Knowledge of Antibiotic Risks Contributes to Primary Care Patients' Expectations of Antibiotics for Common Symptoms.","authors":"Lindsey A Laytner, Barbara W Trautner, Susan Nash, Roger Zoorob, Jennifer O Okoh, Eva Amenta, Kiara Olmeda, Juanita Salinas, Michael K Paasche-Orlow, Larissa Grigoryan","doi":"10.1370/afm.3161","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3161","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient expectations of receiving antibiotics for common symptoms can trigger unnecessary use. We conducted a survey (n = 564) between January 2020 to June 2021 in public and private primary care clinics in Texas to study the prevalence and predictors of patients' antibiotic expectations for common symptoms/illnesses. We surveyed Black patients (33%) and Hispanic/Latine patients (47%), and over 93% expected to receive an antibiotic for at least 1 of the 5 pre-defined symptoms/illnesses. Public clinic patients were nearly twice as likely to expect antibiotics for sore throat, diarrhea, and cold/flu than private clinic patients. Lack of knowledge of potential risks of antibiotic use was associated with increased antibiotic expectations for diarrhea (odds ratio [OR] = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4) and cold/flu symptoms (OR = 2.9; 95% CI, 2.0-4.4). Lower education and inadequate health literacy were predictors of antibiotic expectations for diarrhea. Future antibiotic stewardship interventions should tailor patient education materials to include information on antibiotic risks and guidance on appropriate antibiotic indications.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"421-425"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419724/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Linda Zittleman, John M Westfall, Benjamin Sofie, Cory Lutgen, Douglas Fernald, Tristen L Hall, Camille J Hochheimer, Melanie Murphy, Maret Felzien, L Miriam Dickinson, Brian K Manning, Joseph LeMaster, Donald E Nease
The usual challenges of conducting primary care research, including randomized trials, have been exacerbated, and new ones identified, during the COVID-19 pandemic. HOMER (Home versus Office for Medication Enhanced Recovery; subsequently, Comparing Home, Office, and Telehealth Induction for Medication Enhanced Recovery) is a pragmatic, comparative-effectiveness research trial that aims to answer a key question from patients and clinicians: What is the best setting in which to start treatment with buprenorphine for opioid use disorder for this patient at this time? In this article, we describe the difficult journey to find the answer. The HOMER study began as a randomized trial comparing treatment outcomes in patients starting treatment with buprenorphine via induction at home (unobserved) vs in the office (observed, synchronous). The study aimed to enroll 1,000 participants from 100 diverse primary care practices associated with the State Networks of Colorado Ambulatory Practices and Partners and the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. The research team faced unexpected challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic and dramatic changes in the opioid epidemic. These challenges required changes to the study design, protocol, recruitment intensity, and funding conversations, as well as patience. As this is a participatory research study, we sought, documented, and responded to practice and patient requests for adaptations. Changes included adding a third study arm using telehealth induction (observed via telephone or video, synchronous) and switching to a comprehensive cohort design to answer meaningful patient-centered research questions. Using a narrative approach based on the Greek myth of Homer, we describe here the challenges and adaptations that have provided the opportunity for HOMER to thrive and find the way home. These clinical trial strategies may apply to other studies faced with similar cultural and extreme circumstances.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间,开展初级保健研究(包括随机试验)通常面临的挑战更加严峻,而且还发现了新的挑战。HOMER("在家与办公室用药促进康复";随后是 "比较在家、办公室和远程医疗诱导用药促进康复")是一项务实的比较效果研究试验,旨在回答患者和临床医生提出的一个关键问题:此时对这名患者来说,开始使用丁丙诺啡治疗阿片类药物使用障碍的最佳环境是什么?在本文中,我们将介绍寻找答案的艰难历程。HOMER 研究最初是一项随机试验,比较患者在家中(非观察)与在诊室(观察、同步)通过诱导开始丁丙诺啡治疗的疗效。该研究的目标是招募来自与科罗拉多州非住院医疗实践和合作伙伴网络以及美国家庭医生学会国家研究网络相关的 100 家不同初级保健实践的 1000 名参与者。研究团队面临着与 COVID-19 大流行和阿片类药物流行的巨大变化有关的意想不到的挑战。这些挑战要求我们改变研究设计、方案、招募强度和资金对话,同时也要求我们保持耐心。由于这是一项参与性研究,我们寻求、记录并回应了实践和患者提出的调整要求。这些改变包括增加第三组研究,使用远程医疗诱导(通过电话或视频进行同步观察),以及改用综合队列设计来回答以患者为中心的有意义的研究问题。我们以希腊神话《荷马史诗》为蓝本,采用叙事的方法,在此描述了 HOMER 所面临的挑战和做出的调整,这些调整为 HOMER 的发展提供了机会,并让 HOMER 找到了回家的路。这些临床试验策略可能适用于面临类似文化和极端环境的其他研究。
{"title":"The Odyssey of HOMER: Comparative Effectiveness Research on Medication for Opioid Use Disorder During the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Linda Zittleman, John M Westfall, Benjamin Sofie, Cory Lutgen, Douglas Fernald, Tristen L Hall, Camille J Hochheimer, Melanie Murphy, Maret Felzien, L Miriam Dickinson, Brian K Manning, Joseph LeMaster, Donald E Nease","doi":"10.1370/afm.3149","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3149","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The usual challenges of conducting primary care research, including randomized trials, have been exacerbated, and new ones identified, during the COVID-19 pandemic. HOMER (Home versus Office for Medication Enhanced Recovery; subsequently, Comparing Home, Office, and Telehealth Induction for Medication Enhanced Recovery) is a pragmatic, comparative-effectiveness research trial that aims to answer a key question from patients and clinicians: What is the best setting in which to start treatment with buprenorphine for opioid use disorder for this patient at this time? In this article, we describe the difficult journey to find the answer. The HOMER study began as a randomized trial comparing treatment outcomes in patients starting treatment with buprenorphine via induction at home (unobserved) vs in the office (observed, synchronous). The study aimed to enroll 1,000 participants from 100 diverse primary care practices associated with the State Networks of Colorado Ambulatory Practices and Partners and the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. The research team faced unexpected challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic and dramatic changes in the opioid epidemic. These challenges required changes to the study design, protocol, recruitment intensity, and funding conversations, as well as patience. As this is a participatory research study, we sought, documented, and responded to practice and patient requests for adaptations. Changes included adding a third study arm using telehealth induction (observed via telephone or video, synchronous) and switching to a comprehensive cohort design to answer meaningful patient-centered research questions. Using a narrative approach based on the Greek myth of Homer, we describe here the challenges and adaptations that have provided the opportunity for HOMER to thrive and find the way home. These clinical trial strategies may apply to other studies faced with similar cultural and extreme circumstances.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"444-450"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419717/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Makoto Kaneko, Rei Kansaku, Yusuke Kanakubo, Aya Yumino
{"title":"Deep End Kawasaki/Yokohama: A New Challenge for GPs in Deprived Areas in Japan.","authors":"Makoto Kaneko, Rei Kansaku, Yusuke Kanakubo, Aya Yumino","doi":"10.1370/afm.3146","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3146","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"456"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419727/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Bryce A Ringwald, Michelle Taylor, Dean A Seehusen, Jennifer L Middleton
Purpose: Meeting scholarly activity requirements continues to be a challenge in many family medicine (FM) residency programs. Studies comprehensively describing FM resident scholarship have been limited. We sought to identify institutional factors associated with increased scholarly output and meeting requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).
Objectives: Our goals were to: (1) describe scholarly activity experiences among FM residents compared with ACGME requirements; (2) classify experiences by Boyer's domains of scholarship; and (3) associate experiences with residency program characteristics and scholarly activity infrastructure.
Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey. The survey questions were part of an omnibus survey to FM residency program directors conducted by the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA). All ACGME-accredited US FM residency program directors, identified by the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors, were sampled.
Results: Of the 691 eligible program directors, 298 (43%) completed the survey. The respondents reported that 25% or more residents exceeded ACGME minimum output, 17% reported that 25% or more residents published their work, and 50% reported that 25% or more residents delivered conference presentations. Programs exceeding ACGME scholarship requirements exhibit robust infrastructure characterized by access to faculty mentorship, scholarly activity curricula, Institutional Review Board, medical librarian, and statistician.
Conclusions: These findings suggest the need for codified ACGME requirements for scholarly activity infrastructure to ensure access to resources in FM residency programs. By fostering FM resident engagement in scholarly activity, programs help to create a culture of inquiry, and address discrepancies in funding and output among FM residency programs.
{"title":"Family Medicine Resident Scholarly Activity Infrastructure, Output, and Dissemination: A CERA Survey.","authors":"Bryce A Ringwald, Michelle Taylor, Dean A Seehusen, Jennifer L Middleton","doi":"10.1370/afm.3160","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3160","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Meeting scholarly activity requirements continues to be a challenge in many family medicine (FM) residency programs. Studies comprehensively describing FM resident scholarship have been limited. We sought to identify institutional factors associated with increased scholarly output and meeting requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our goals were to: (1) describe scholarly activity experiences among FM residents compared with ACGME requirements; (2) classify experiences by Boyer's domains of scholarship; and (3) associate experiences with residency program characteristics and scholarly activity infrastructure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional survey. The survey questions were part of an omnibus survey to FM residency program directors conducted by the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA). All ACGME-accredited US FM residency program directors, identified by the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors, were sampled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 691 eligible program directors, 298 (43%) completed the survey. The respondents reported that 25% or more residents exceeded ACGME minimum output, 17% reported that 25% or more residents published their work, and 50% reported that 25% or more residents delivered conference presentations. Programs exceeding ACGME scholarship requirements exhibit robust infrastructure characterized by access to faculty mentorship, scholarly activity curricula, Institutional Review Board, medical librarian, and statistician.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest the need for codified ACGME requirements for scholarly activity infrastructure to ensure access to resources in FM residency programs. By fostering FM resident engagement in scholarly activity, programs help to create a culture of inquiry, and address discrepancies in funding and output among FM residency programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"400-409"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419713/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joelle T Taknint, Maedeh Marzoughi, Resham Gellatly, Maxine H Krengel, Sarah L Kimball
{"title":"Improving Access to Disability Assessment for US Citizenship Applicants in Primary Care: An Embedded Neuropsychological Assessment Innovation.","authors":"Joelle T Taknint, Maedeh Marzoughi, Resham Gellatly, Maxine H Krengel, Sarah L Kimball","doi":"10.1370/afm.3148","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3148","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"458"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419725/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"New Tools Take Whole-Person Approach to Obesity Care.","authors":"David Mitchell","doi":"10.1370/afm.3185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3185","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"463"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alexander Singer, Natalie Gross, Leyla Haddad, Allison Cole
{"title":"PBRNs: Past, Present, and Future: A NAPCRG Report on the Practice-Based Research Network Conference.","authors":"Alexander Singer, Natalie Gross, Leyla Haddad, Allison Cole","doi":"10.1370/afm.3187","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3187","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"462-463"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419719/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309046","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simone van den Bulk, Amy Manten, Tobias N Bonten, Ralf E Harskamp
Purpose: Chest pain frequently poses a diagnostic challenge for general practitioners (GPs). Utilizing risk stratification tools might help GPs to rule out acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and make appropriate referral decisions. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating risk stratification tools for chest pain in primary care settings, both with and without troponin assays. Our aims were to assess the performance of tools for ruling out ACS and to provide a comprehensive review of the current evidence.
Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase for articles up to October 9, 2023 concerning adult patients with acute chest pain in primary care settings, for whom risk stratification tools (clinical decision rules [CDRs] and/or single biomarker tests) were used. To identify eligible studies, a combination of active learning and backward snowballing was applied. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment (following the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool) were performed independently by 2 researchers.
Results: Of the 1,204 studies screened, 14 were included in the final review. Nine studies validated 7 different CDRs without troponin. Sensitivities ranged from 75.0% to 97.0%, and negative predictive values (NPV) ranged from 82.4% to 99.7%. None of the CDRs outperformed the unaided judgment of GP's. Five studies reported on strategies using troponin measurements. Studies using high-sensitivity troponin showed highest diagnostic accuracy with sensitivity 83.3% to 100% and NPV 98.8% to 100%.
Conclusion: Clinical decision rules without troponin and the use of conventional troponin showed insufficient sensitivity to rule out ACS in primary care and are not recommended as standalone tools. High-sensitivity troponin strategies are promising, but studies are limited. Further prospective validation in primary care is needed before implementation.
{"title":"Chest Pain in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of Risk Stratification Tools to Rule Out Acute Coronary Syndrome.","authors":"Simone van den Bulk, Amy Manten, Tobias N Bonten, Ralf E Harskamp","doi":"10.1370/afm.3141","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3141","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Chest pain frequently poses a diagnostic challenge for general practitioners (GPs). Utilizing risk stratification tools might help GPs to rule out acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and make appropriate referral decisions. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating risk stratification tools for chest pain in primary care settings, both with and without troponin assays. Our aims were to assess the performance of tools for ruling out ACS and to provide a comprehensive review of the current evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed and Embase for articles up to October 9, 2023 concerning adult patients with acute chest pain in primary care settings, for whom risk stratification tools (clinical decision rules [CDRs] and/or single biomarker tests) were used. To identify eligible studies, a combination of active learning and backward snowballing was applied. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment (following the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool) were performed independently by 2 researchers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1,204 studies screened, 14 were included in the final review. Nine studies validated 7 different CDRs without troponin. Sensitivities ranged from 75.0% to 97.0%, and negative predictive values (NPV) ranged from 82.4% to 99.7%. None of the CDRs outperformed the unaided judgment of GP's. Five studies reported on strategies using troponin measurements. Studies using high-sensitivity troponin showed highest diagnostic accuracy with sensitivity 83.3% to 100% and NPV 98.8% to 100%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Clinical decision rules without troponin and the use of conventional troponin showed insufficient sensitivity to rule out ACS in primary care and are not recommended as standalone tools. High-sensitivity troponin strategies are promising, but studies are limited. Further prospective validation in primary care is needed before implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 5","pages":"426-436"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11419710/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142309032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Purpose: We undertook a study to investigate the relationship between duration of medication use and prevalence of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) among patients with insulin-treated or sulfonylurea-treated type 2 diabetes in Taiwan.
Methods: A total of 898 patients (41.0% insulin users, 65.1% sulfonylurea users; mean [SD] age = 59.9 [12.3] years, 50.7% female) were enrolled in pharmacies, clinics, and health bureaus of Tainan City, Taiwan. Presence of IAH was determined with Chinese versions of the Gold questionnaire (Gold-TW) and Clarke questionnaire (Clarke-TW). Sociodemographics, disease and treatment histories, diabetes-related medical care, and health status were collected. We used multiple logistic regression models to assess the relationship between duration of medication use and IAH.
Results: Overall IAH prevalence was 41.0% (Gold-TW) and 28.2% (Clarke-TW) among insulin users, and 65.3% (Gold-TW) and 51.3% (Clarke-TW) among sulfonylurea users. Prevalence increased with the duration of sulfonylurea use, whereas it decreased with the duration of insulin use. After controlling for potential confounders, 5 or more years of sulfonylurea use was significantly associated with 3.50-fold (95% CI, 2.39-5.13) and 3.06-fold (95% CI, 2.11-4.44) increases in the odds of IAH based on the Gold-TW and Clarke-TW criteria, respectively. On the other hand, regular blood glucose testing and retinal examinations were associated with reduced odds in both insulin users and sulfonylurea users.
Conclusions: The prevalence of IAH was high among patients using sulfonylureas long term, but the odds of this complication were attenuated for those who received regular diabetes-related medical care. Our study suggests that long-term sulfonylurea use and irregular follow-up increase risk for IAH. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the observed associations.Annals Early Access article.
{"title":"Long-Term Sulfonylurea Use and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Taiwan.","authors":"Hsiang-Ju Cheng, Siou-Huei Weng, Jia-Ling Wu, Shu-Tin Yeh, Hua-Fen Chen, Hermina Novida, Huang-Tz Ou, Chung-Yi Li","doi":"10.1370/afm.3129","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3129","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We undertook a study to investigate the relationship between duration of medication use and prevalence of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) among patients with insulin-treated or sulfonylurea-treated type 2 diabetes in Taiwan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 898 patients (41.0% insulin users, 65.1% sulfonylurea users; mean [SD] age = 59.9 [12.3] years, 50.7% female) were enrolled in pharmacies, clinics, and health bureaus of Tainan City, Taiwan. Presence of IAH was determined with Chinese versions of the Gold questionnaire (Gold-TW) and Clarke questionnaire (Clarke-TW). Sociodemographics, disease and treatment histories, diabetes-related medical care, and health status were collected. We used multiple logistic regression models to assess the relationship between duration of medication use and IAH.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall IAH prevalence was 41.0% (Gold-TW) and 28.2% (Clarke-TW) among insulin users, and 65.3% (Gold-TW) and 51.3% (Clarke-TW) among sulfonylurea users. Prevalence increased with the duration of sulfonylurea use, whereas it decreased with the duration of insulin use. After controlling for potential confounders, 5 or more years of sulfonylurea use was significantly associated with 3.50-fold (95% CI, 2.39-5.13) and 3.06-fold (95% CI, 2.11-4.44) increases in the odds of IAH based on the Gold-TW and Clarke-TW criteria, respectively. On the other hand, regular blood glucose testing and retinal examinations were associated with reduced odds in both insulin users and sulfonylurea users.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence of IAH was high among patients using sulfonylureas long term, but the odds of this complication were attenuated for those who received regular diabetes-related medical care. Our study suggests that long-term sulfonylurea use and irregular follow-up increase risk for IAH. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the observed associations.<i>Annals</i> Early Access article.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"309-316"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11268696/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141447543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Louis Steven Levene, Richard H Baker, Christopher Newby, Emilie M Couchman, George K Freeman
Purpose: Relationship continuity of care has declined across English primary health care, with cross-sectional and longitudinal variations between general practices predicted by population and service factors. We aimed to describe cross-sectional and longitudinal variations across the COVID-19 pandemic and determine whether practice factors predicted the variations.
Methods: We conducted a longitudinal, ecological study of English general practices during 2018-2022 with continuity data, excluding practices with fewer than 750 patients or National Health Service (NHS) payments exceeding £500 per patient. Variables were derived from published data. The continuity measure was the product of weighted responses to 2 General Practice Patient Survey questions. In a multilevel mixed-effects model, the fixed effects were 11 variables' interactions with time: baseline continuity, NHS region, deprivation, location, percentage White ethnicity, list size, general practitioner and nurse numbers, contract type, NHS payments per patient, and percentage of patients seen on the same day as booking. The random effects were practices.
Results: Main analyses were based on 6,010 practices (out of 7,190 active practices). During 2018-2022, mean continuity in these practices declined (from 29.3% to 19.0%) and the coefficient of variation across practices increased (from 48.1% to 63.6%). Both slopes were steepest between 2021 and 2022. Practices having more general practitioners and higher percentages of patients seen the same day had slower declines. Practices having higher baseline continuity, located in certain non-London regions, and having higher percentages of White patients had faster declines. The remaining variables were not predictors.
Conclusions: Variables potentially associated with greater appointment availability predicted slower declines in continuity, with worsening declines and relative variability immediately after the COVID-19 lockdown, possibly reflecting surges in demand. To achieve better levels of continuity for those seeking it, practices can increase appointment availability within appointment systems that prioritize continuity.Annals Early Access article.
{"title":"Ongoing Decline in Continuity With GPs in English General Practices: A Longitudinal Study Across the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Louis Steven Levene, Richard H Baker, Christopher Newby, Emilie M Couchman, George K Freeman","doi":"10.1370/afm.3128","DOIUrl":"10.1370/afm.3128","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Relationship continuity of care has declined across English primary health care, with cross-sectional and longitudinal variations between general practices predicted by population and service factors. We aimed to describe cross-sectional and longitudinal variations across the COVID-19 pandemic and determine whether practice factors predicted the variations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a longitudinal, ecological study of English general practices during 2018-2022 with continuity data, excluding practices with fewer than 750 patients or National Health Service (NHS) payments exceeding £500 per patient. Variables were derived from published data. The continuity measure was the product of weighted responses to 2 General Practice Patient Survey questions. In a multilevel mixed-effects model, the fixed effects were 11 variables' interactions with time: baseline continuity, NHS region, deprivation, location, percentage White ethnicity, list size, general practitioner and nurse numbers, contract type, NHS payments per patient, and percentage of patients seen on the same day as booking. The random effects were practices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Main analyses were based on 6,010 practices (out of 7,190 active practices). During 2018-2022, mean continuity in these practices declined (from 29.3% to 19.0%) and the coefficient of variation across practices increased (from 48.1% to 63.6%). Both slopes were steepest between 2021 and 2022. Practices having more general practitioners and higher percentages of patients seen the same day had slower declines. Practices having higher baseline continuity, located in certain non-London regions, and having higher percentages of White patients had faster declines. The remaining variables were not predictors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variables potentially associated with greater appointment availability predicted slower declines in continuity, with worsening declines and relative variability immediately after the COVID-19 lockdown, possibly reflecting surges in demand. To achieve better levels of continuity for those seeking it, practices can increase appointment availability within appointment systems that prioritize continuity.<i>Annals</i> Early Access article.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"301-308"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11268676/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141447544","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}