Search

BackgroundType 2 diabetes affects 30 million Americans, representing a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Self-management support is an important component of chronic illness care and is a key pillar of the chronic care model. Face-to-face teaching and patient education materials suffer from being static or incompatible with mobile lifestyles. Digital apps provide a self-management support alternative that is convenient and scalable. ObjectiveThis pilot study tested the real-world deployment of a self-guided mobile app for diabetes education (Time2Focus app; MicroMass Communications Inc, Cary, NC), which utilizes evidence-based content and gamification to deliver an interactive learning experience. MethodsPrimary care providers were approached for permission to invite their patients to participate. Eligible patients were 18 to 89 years of age, had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥8% and

Abstract Background Type 2 diabetes is a prevalent chronic condition globally that results in extensive morbidity, decreased quality of life, and increased health services utilization. Lifestyle changes can prevent the development of diabetes, but require patient engagement. Genetic risk testing might represent a new tool to increase patients' motivation for lifestyle changes. Here we describe the rationale, development, and design of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the clinical and personal utility of incorporating type 2 diabetes genetic risk testing into comprehensive diabetes risk assessments performed in a primary care setting. Methods/Design Patients are recruited in the laboratory waiting areas of two primary care clinics and enrolled into one of three study arms. Those interested in genetic risk testing are randomized to receive either a standard risk assessment (SRA) for type 2 diabetes incorporating conventional risk factors plus upfront disclosure of the results of genetic risk testing ("SRA+G" arm), or the SRA alone ("SRA" arm). Participants not interested in genetic risk testing will not receive the test, but will receive SRA (forming a third, "no-test" arm). Risk counseling is provided by clinic staff (not study staff external to the clinic). Fasting plasma glucose, insulin levels, body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference are measured at baseline and 12 months, as are patients' self-reported behavioral and emotional responses to diabetes risk information. Primary outcomes are changes in insulin resistance and BMI after 12 months; secondary outcomes include changes in diet patterns, physical activity, waist circumference, and perceived risk of developing diabetes. Discussion The utility, feasibility, and efficacy of providing patients with genetic risk information for common chronic diseases in primary care remain unknown. The study described here will help to establish whether providing type 2 diabetes genetic risk information in a primary care setting can help improve patients' clinical outcomes, risk perceptions, and/or their engagement in healthy behavior change. In addition, study design features such as the use of existing clinic personnel for risk counseling could inform the future development and implementation of care models for the use of individual genetic risk information in primary care. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00849563

Introduction: Health systems are seeking innovative solutions to improve specialty care access. Electronic consultations (eConsults) allow specialists to provide formal clinical recommendations to primary care providers (PCPs) based on patient chart review, without a face-to-face visit.Methods: We implemented a nephrology eConsult pilot program within a large, academic primary care practice to facilitate timely communication between nephrologists and PCPs. We used primary care referral data to compare wait times and completion rates between traditional referrals and eConsults. We surveyed PCPs to assess satisfaction with the program.Results: For traditional nephrology referrals placed during the study period (July 2016-March 2017), there was a 51-day median appointment wait time and a 40.9% referral completion rate. For eConsults, there was a median nephrologist response time of one day and a 100% completion rate; 67.5% of eConsults did not require a subsequent face-to-face specialty appointment. For eConsults that were converted to an in-person visit, the median wait time and completion rate were 40 days and 73.1%, respectively. Compared to traditional referrals placed during the study period, eConsults converted to in-person visits were more likely to be completed ( p = 0.001). Survey responses revealed that PCPs were highly satisfied with the program and consider the quick turnaround time as the greatest benefit.Discussion: Our eConsult pilot program reduced nephrology wait times and significantly increased referral completion rates. In large integrated health systems, eConsults have considerable potential to improve access to specialty care, reduce unnecessary appointments, and optimize the patient population being seen by specialists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Type 2 diabetes is a major health burden in the United States, and population trends suggest this burden will increase. High interest in, and increased availability of, testing for genetic risk of type 2 diabetes presents a new opportunity for reducing type 2 diabetes risk for many patients; however, to date, there is little evidence that genetic testing positively affects type 2 diabetes prevention. Genetic information may not fit patients’ illness representations, which may reduce the chances of risk-reducing behavior changes. The present study aimed to examine illness representations in a clinical sample who are at risk for type 2 diabetes and interested in genetic testing. The authors used the Common Sense Model to analyze survey responses of 409 patients with type 2 diabetes risk factors. Patients were interested in genetic testing for type 2 diabetes risk and believed in its importance. Most patients believed that genetic factors are important to developing type 2 diabetes (67%), that diet and exercise are effective in preventing type 2 diabetes (95%), and that lifestyle changes are more effective than drugs (86%). Belief in genetic causality was not related to poorer self-reported health behaviors. These results suggest that patients’ interest in genetic testing for type 2 diabetes might produce a teachable moment that clinicians can use to counsel behavior change. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

1. Self-report the ability to describe what barriers residents perceive to having serious illness conversations in the outpatient setting. 2. Self-report the ability describe what interventions residents perceive to be most useful to increase their ability to have serious illness conversations in the outpatient setting. While primary care providers regularly engage patients in serious illness conversations (SIC), it is not well known what specific challenges resident physicians face to achieving this Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competency. This project assessed resident perceptions of barriers to conducting outpatient SIC as well as potential interventions to address these barriers. We distributed an electronic survey to all categorical internal medicine and medicine-psychiatry residents at our institution. Questions addressed outpatient SIC barriers and potential interventions in several domains: structural issues, personal knowledge, and communication skills. We reported results using descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, comparing responses by year in training (interns vs second and third years). Likert-scale responses were dichotomized to a "not at all or slightly" versus "moderate or extreme" barrier or helpful intervention. Out of 149 residents, 71 completed the survey (response rate 48%). Highest-scoring barriers to having outpatient SIC were at the structural level, relating to (1) lack of time in clinic (99%), (2) need to prioritize other medical problems (94%), and (3) lack of continuity (62%). Discomfort with communication frameworks was not reported as a major barrier (21%). Highest-scoring interventions included the ability to schedule dedicated SIC visits with themselves (96%) or with another provider (82%). When comparing interns to second and third years, interns were significantly less confident in their ability to have SICs and more likely to report lack of knowledge areas (ie, not understanding SIC components, patient prognosis, or how to fill out paperwork, p<0.05). Residents report significant structural barriers to SIC conversations, such as limitations in time, continuity, and competing medical priorities, that may warrant greater program attention to interventions such as clinic schedules and workflow. Additional trainings may be most beneficial if targeted to interns at the beginning of their medical training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]