Search

Opioid use disorder (OUD) represents a public health crisis in the United States. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) with buprenorphine in primary care is a proven OUD treatment strategy. MOUD induction is when patients begin withdrawal and receive the first doses of buprenorphine. Differences between induction methods might influence short-term stabilization, long-term maintenance, and quality of life. This paper describes the protocol for a study designed to: (1) compare short-term stabilization and long-term maintenance treatment engagement in MOUD in patients receiving office, home, or telehealth induction and (2) identify clinically-relevant practice and patient characteristics associated with successful long-term treatment. The study design is a randomized, parallel group, pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial of three care models of MOUD induction in 100 primary care practices in the United States. Eligible patients are at least 16 years old, have been identified by their clinician as having opioid dependence and would benefit from MOUD. Patients will be randomized to one of three induction comparators: office, home, or telehealth induction. Primary outcomes are buprenorphine medication-taking and illicit opioid use at 30, 90, and 270 days post-induction. Secondary outcomes include quality of life and potential mediators of treatment maintenance (intentions, planning, automaticity). Potential moderators include social determinants of health, substance use history and appeal, and executive function. An intent to treat analysis will assess effects of the interventions on long-term treatment, using general/generalized linear mixed models, adjusted for covariates, for the outcomes analysis. Analysis includes practice- and patient-level random effects for hierarchical/longitudinal data. No large-scale, randomized comparative effectiveness research has compared home induction to office or telehealth MOUD induction on long-term outcomes for patients with OUD seen in primary care settings. The results of this study will offer primary care providers evidence and guidance in selecting the most beneficial induction method(s) for specific patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Diabetes affects approximately 34 million Americans and many do not achieve glycemic targets. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is associated with improved health outcomes for patients with diabetes. Most adults with diabetes receive care for their diabetes in primary care practices, where uptake of CGM is unclear. Methods: We used a cross-sectional web-based survey to assess CGM prescribing behaviors and resource needs among primary care clinicians across the United States. We used descriptive statistics and multivariable regression to identify characteristics associated with prescribing behaviors, openness to prescribing CGM, and to understand resources needed to support use of CGM in primary care. Results: Clinicians located more than 40 miles from the nearest endocrinologist's office were more likely to have prescribed CGM and reported greater likelihood to prescribe CGM in the future than those located within 10 miles of an endocrinologist. Clinicians who served more Medicare patients reported favorable attitudes toward future prescribing and higher confidence using CGM to manage diabetes than clinicians with lower Medicare patient volume. The most-needed resources to support CGM use in primary care were consultation on insurance issues and CGM training. Conclusions: Primary care clinicians are interested in using CGM for patients with diabetes, but many lack the resources to implement use of this diabetes technology. Use of CGM can be supported with education in the form of workshops and consultation on insurance issues targeted toward residents, recent graduates, and practices without a nearby endocrinologist. Continued expansion of Medicare and Medicaid coverage for CGM can also support CGM use in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medications contribute to patients' out-of-pocket costs, yet most clinicians do not routinely screen for patients' cost-of-medication (COM) concerns.Objective: To assess whether a single training session improves COM conversations.Design: Before-after cross-sectional surveys of patients and qualitative interviews with clinicians and staff.Setting: 7 primary care practices in 3 U.S. states.Participants: In total, 700 patients were surveyed from May 2017 to January 2018: 50 patients per practice before the intervention and another 50 patients per practice after the intervention. Eligibility criteria included age 18 years or older and taking 1 or more long-term medications. Qualitative interviews with 45 staff members were conducted.Intervention: A single 60-minute training session for clinicians and staff from each practice on COM importance, team-based screening, and cost-saving strategies.Measurements: Patient data (demographics, number of long-term medications, total monthly out-of-pocket medication costs, and history of cost-related medication nonadherence) were obtained immediately before and 3 months after the intervention. Practice staff were interviewed 3 months after the intervention.Results: A total of 700 patient surveys were completed. Frequency of COM discussion improved in 6 of the 7 practices and remained unchanged in 1 practice. Overall, COM conversations with patients increased from 17% at baseline to 32% postintervention (P = 0.00). There was substantial heterogeneity among sites in before-after differences in patient-reported out-of-pocket COM. Qualitative analyses from key informant interviews showed wide variation in implementation of screening approaches, workflow, adoption of a team-based approach, and strategies for addressing COM.Limitation: It is not known whether improvements in COM conversations were sustained beyond 3 months.Conclusion: A single team training to screen and address patients' medication cost concerns improved COM discussions over the short term. Further research is needed to assess sustained effects and impact on patient costs and medication adherence and to determine whether more intensive, scalable interventions are needed.Primary Funding Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical activity (PA) counselling is challenging in primary care. It is unknown whether clinician training on the 5As (Ask, Advise, Agree, Assist, Arrange) improves PA counselling skills.Objective: To evaluate the effect of a clinician training intervention on PA counselling for underserved adults using the 5As framework.Methods: Pragmatic pilot clinical trial was used in the study. Clinicians (n = 13) were randomly assigned to two groups. Each group received the intervention consisting of four 1-hour training sessions to teach the 5As for PA counselling. Patient-clinician visits (n = 325) were audio recorded at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at 6 months. Outcomes were the frequency and quality of PA discussions using the 5As, assessed by blinded coders.Results: Patients' mean age was 44 years; 75% were African American. PA was discussed in 37% (n = 119) of visits overall and did not change from baseline to follow-up. When PA discussions occurred, the frequency of 5As increased from baseline to follow-up for Advise (51-54%), Agree (11-26%), and Assist (11-17%); however, none of the 5As had a statistically significant increase. For Agree, exploration of patient willingness to engage in PA increased from 23% at baseline to 50% at follow-up.Conclusion: A clinician-directed intervention to improve PA counselling increased the frequency of Advise, Agree and Assist, and the quality of Ask and Agree statements, though the absolute numbers were small and only Agree reached statistical significance. Future research is needed to understand the factors that affect the optimal uptake and approach to 5As counselling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which aims to develop a coding scheme to measure the accomplishment of advise, assess, assist and arrange (5As) in primary care. A coding scheme was developed using audio-recorded discussions of physical activity, published definitions of the 5As, and direct-observation. A good inter-rater agreement for the 5As was achieved by the scheme which shows that physicians infrequently assess patient readiness to change and patient expressions of ambivalence are common.

Background: Computerized, tailored interventions have the potential to be a cost-effective means to assist a wide variety of individuals with behavior change. This study examined the effect of computerized tailored physical activity reports on primary care patients'' physical activity at 6 months. Design: Two-group randomized clinical trial with physicians as the unit of randomization. Patients were placed in the intervention (n=187) or control group (n=207) based on their physician''s assignment. Setting/participants: Primary care physicians (n=22) and their adult patients (n=394) from Philadelphia PA. The study and analyses were conducted from 2004 to 2010. Intervention: The intervention group completed physical activity surveys at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months. Based on their responses, participants received four feedback reports at each time point. The reports aimed to motivate participants to increase physical activity, personalized to participants'' needs; they also included an activity prescription. The control group received identical procedures, except that they received general reports on preventive screening based on their responses to preventive screening questions. Main outcome measures: Minutes of physical activity measured by the 7-Day Physical Activity Recall interview at 6 months. Results: Participants were 69% female, 59% African-American, and had diverse educational and income levels; the retention rate was 89.6%. After adjusting for baseline levels of activity and gender, there were no differences in physical activity at 6 months. The intervention group increased their total physical activity by a mean of 139 minutes; the control group had a mean increase of 109 minutes (p=0.45). Conclusions: Although physical activity increased within both groups, computerized tailored physical activity reports did not significantly increase physical activity between groups at 6 months among ethnically and socioeconomically diverse adults in primary care. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The intersection of 2 underserved populations-refugees and deaf individuals-presents novel challenges to health care systems and has not been described previously. A patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is uniquely equipped to provide outstanding primary care to disadvantaged groups. As an illustrative case study, we present our experience applying principles of the PCMH to address an extremely challenging clinical situation: providing high-quality maternity care to a recently immigrated Vietnamese refugee couple lacking formal language skills. We describe how enhanced access, continuity, coordination, and cultural appropriateness can facilitate favorable outcomes in even daunting circumstances. By collaborating with multiple interpreters, the health center staff, and the extended family, we effectively mobilized an expanded system of care to ensure informed consent and shared decision making, ultimately culminating in a successful labor and vaginal delivery. Through organizational and individual commitment to the tenets of the PCMH, we demonstrate the particular strengths of family medicine training sites in caring for similar patients and families with complex cultural and linguistic barriers to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a systematic review that intends to evaluate the clinical trials of clinician-initiated counseling interventions for promoting physical activity in underserved populations, specifically referred to individuals from minority ethnic backgrounds, or vulnerable populations like people with low educational attainment, low income, lack of insurance, or those people who reside in rural communities. It cites several studies which aim to analyze the physical activity programs among patients in primary care settings.

The article discusses the transition from in-person to telehealth group visits in a mindful-eating healthy nutrition program during the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. Also cited are the challenges faced by clinicians and patients during the program like familiarization with technologies like telehealth software, and some program benefits like streamlined check-in and no commute time.

Background: There is currently a lack of information about the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication among the general public, patients, and health professionals from primary research. Objective: To review the current published literature to identify the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication among the general public, patients, and health professionals, and identify current gaps in the literature to provide recommendations for future health communication research. Methods: This paper is a review using a systematic approach. A systematic search of the literature was conducted using nine electronic databases and manual searches to locate peer-reviewed studies published between January 2002 and February 2012. Results: The search identified 98 original research studies that included the uses, benefits, and/or limitations of social media for health communication among the general public, patients, and health professionals. The methodological quality of the studies assessed using the Downs and Black instrument was low; this was mainly due to the fact that the vast majority of the studies in this review included limited methodologies and was mainly exploratory and descriptive in nature. Seven main uses of social media for health communication were identified, including focusing on increasing interactions with others, and facilitating, sharing, and obtaining health messages. The six key overarching benefits were identified as (1) increased interactions with others, (2) more available, shared, and tailored information, (3) increased accessibility and widening access to health information, (4) peer/social/emotional support, (5) public health surveillance, and (6) potential to influence health policy. Twelve limitations were identified, primarily consisting of quality concerns and lack of reliability, confidentiality, and privacy. Conclusions: Social media brings a new dimension to health care as it offers a medium to be used by the public, patients, and health professionals to communicate about health issues with the possibility of potentially improving health outcomes. Social media is a powerful tool, which offers collaboration between users and is a social interaction mechanism for a range of individuals. Although there are several benefits to the use of social media for health communication, the information exchanged needs to be monitored for quality and reliability, and the users' confidentiality and privacy need to be maintained. Eight gaps in the literature and key recommendations for future health communication research were provided. Examples of these recommendations include the need to determine the relative effectiveness of different types of social media for health communication using randomized control trials and to explore potential mechanisms for monitoring and enhancing the quality and reliability of health communication using social media. Further robust and comprehensive evaluation and review, using a range of methodologies, are required to establish whether social media improves health communication practice both in the short and long terms. (J Med Internet Res 2013;15(4):e85) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Special patient populations can present unique opportunities and challenges to integrating primary care and behavioral health services. This article focuses on four special populations: children with special needs, persons with severe and persistent mental illness, refugees, and deaf people who communicate via sign language. The current state of primary care and behavioral health collaboration regarding each of these four populations is examined via Doherty, McDaniel, and Baird's (1996) five-level collaboration model. The section on children with special needs offers contrasting case studies that highlight the consequences of effective versus ineffective service integration. The challenges and potential benefits of service integration for the severely mentally ill are examined via description of PRICARe (Promoting Resources for Integrated Care and Recovery), a model program in Colorado. The discussion regarding a refugee population focuses on service integration needs and emerging collaborative models as well as ways in which refugee mental health research can be improved. The section on deaf individuals examines how sign language users are typically marginalized in health care settings and offers suggestions for improving the health care experiences and outcomes of deaf persons. A well-integrated model program for deaf persons in Austria is described. All four of these special populations will benefit from further integration of primary care and mental health services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]