Search

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among cancer survivors. Mental health is considered an important risk factor affecting the treatment of cardiovascular disease. However, little is known about the use of secondary prevention strategies for CVD in patients with both cancer and CVD. This study aimed to compare the utilisation of primary care chronic disease management plans, mental health care and guideline-indicated cardioprotective medications among CVD patients with and without cancer. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional study utilising clinical data of patients with CVD from 50 Australian primary care practices. Outcomes included the use of chronic disease management plans, mental health care, guideline-indicated cardioprotective medications and influenza vaccination. Logistic regression, accounting for demographic and clinical covariates and clustering effects by practices, was used to compare the two groups. RESULTS: Of the 15,040 patients with CVD, 1,486 patients (9.9%) concurrently had cancer. Patients with cancer, compared to those without, were older (77.6 vs 71.8 years, p<0.001), more likely to drink alcohol (62.6% vs 55.7%, p<0.001), have lower systolic (130.3±17.8 vs 132.5±21.1 mmHg, p<0.001) and diastolic (72.2±11 vs 75.3±34 mmHg, p<0.001) blood pressure. Although suboptimal for both groups, patients with cancer were significantly more likely to have general practice management plans (GPMPs) (51.4% vs 43.2%, p<0.001), coordination of team care arrangements (TCAs) (46.2% vs 37.0%, p<0.001), have a review of either GPMP or TCA (42.8% vs 34.7%, p<0.001), have a mental health treatment consultation (15.4% vs 10.5%, p=0.004) and be prescribed blood pressure-lowering medications (70.1% vs 66.0%, p=0.002). However, there were no statistical differences in the prescription of lipid-lowering or antiplatelet medications. After adjustments for covariates and multiple testing, patients with cancer did not show

As population aging progresses, demands of patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD) on the primary care services is inevitably increased. However, the utilisation of primary care services across varying age groups is unknown. The study aims to explore age-related variations in provision of chronic disease management plans, mental health care, guideline-indicated cardiovascular medications and influenza vaccination among patients with CVD over differing ages presenting to primary care. Data for patients with CVD were extracted from 50 Australian general practices. Logistic regression, accounting for covariates and clustering effects by practices, was used for statistical analysis. Of the 14,602 patients with CVD (mean age, 72.5 years), patients aged 65-74, 75-84 and ≥85 years were significantly more likely to have a GP management plan prepared (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.6, 1.88 and 1.55, respectively, p < 0.05), have a formal team care arrangement (aOR: 1.49, 1.8, 1.65, respectively, p < 0.05) and have a review of either (aOR: 1.63, 2.09, 1.93, respectively, p < 0.05) than those < 65 years. Patients aged ≥ 65 years were more likely to be prescribed blood-pressure-lowering medications and to be vaccinated for influenza. However, the adjusted odds of being prescribed lipid-lowering and antiplatelet medications and receiving mental health care were significantly lowest among patients ≥ 85 years. There are age-related variations in provision of primary care services and pharmacological therapy. GPs are targeting care plans to older people who are more likely to have long-term conditions and complex needs.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, tobacco smoking rates have declined but inequalities remain with significantly higher smoking prevalence among low-socioeconomic populations. Clinical trial data suggest vaporized nicotine products (VNPs) aid smoking cessation. Most VNP trials have used refillable tank systems, but newer generation (pod) devices now comprise the largest market share yet have limited clinical trial evidence on safety and effectiveness. This study evaluates the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of VNPs (pod and tank device) compared with nicotine replacement therapy ([NRT]-gum or lozenge) for smoking cessation. METHODS: This is a two-arm, open-label, superiority, parallel group, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment. The RCT is conducted at the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Participants are people who smoke daily, are interested in quitting and receive a government pension or allowance (N = 1058). Participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive 8 weeks of free: VNPs, with pod (40 mg/mL nicotine salt) and tank device (18 mg/mL freebase nicotine) in mixed flavours; or NRT (gum or lozenge; 4 mg). All participants will receive daily text message behavioural support for 5 weeks. Assessments will be undertaken by telephone at baseline, with three follow-up calls (two check-in calls within the first month and final follow-up at 7 months post randomization) to ascertain smoking status, treatment adherence and adverse events. The primary outcome is 6-month continuous abstinence verified by carbon monoxide breath test of ≤5ppm at 7-month follow-up. Safety and cost-effectiveness of VNPs versus NRT will also be evaluated. DISCUSSION: Further data are required to strengthen certainty of evidence for VNPs aiding smoking cessation, particularly for newer generation pod devices. To our knowledge, this trial is the first to offer choice

BACKGROUND: Practice-level quality improvement initiatives using rapidly advancing technology offers a multidimensional approach to reduce cardiovascular disease burden. For the "QUality improvement in primary care to prevent hospitalisations and improve Effectiveness and efficiency of care for people Living with heart disease" (QUEL) cluster randomised controlled trial, a 12-month quality improvement intervention was designed for primary care practices to use data and implement progressive changes using "Plan, Do, Study, Act" cycles within their practices with training in a series of interactive workshops. This protocol aims to describe the systematic methods to conduct a process evaluation of the data-driven intervention within the QUEL study. METHODS: A mixed-method approach will be used to conduct the evaluation. Quantitative data collected throughout the intervention period, via surveys and intervention materials, will be used to (1) identify the key elements of the intervention and how, for whom and in what context it was effective; (2) determine if the intervention is delivered as intended; and (3) describe practice engagement, commitment and capacity associated with various intervention components. Qualitative data, collected via semi-structured interviews and open-ended questions, will be used to gather in-depth understanding of the (1) satisfaction, utility, barriers and enablers; (2) acceptability, uptake and feasibility, and (3) effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the implementation of the intervention. CONCLUSION: Findings from the evaluation will provide new knowledge on the implementation of a complex, multi-component intervention at practice-level using their own electronic patient data to enhance secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) number ACTRN12619001790134.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a multifaceted intervention on diet, physical activity and health literacy of overweight and obese patients attending primary care. DESIGN: A pragmatic two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Urban general practices in lower socioeconomic areas in Sydney and Adelaide. PARTICIPANTS: We aimed to recruit 800 patients in each arm. Baseline assessment was completed by 215 patients (120 intervention and 95 control). INTERVENTION: A practice nurse-led preventive health check, a mobile application and telephone coaching. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months, and included patient health and eHealth literacy, weight, waist circumference and blood pressure. Secondary outcomes included changes in diet and physical activity, preventive advice and referral, blood lipids, quality of life and costs. Univariate and multivariate analyses of difference-in-differences (DiD) estimates for each outcome were conducted. RESULTS: At 6 months, the intervention group, compared with the control group, demonstrated a greater increase in Health Literacy Questionnaire domain 8 score (ability to find good health information; mean DiD 0.22; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.44). There were similar differences for domain 9 score (understanding health information well enough to know what to do) among patients below the median at baseline. Differences were reduced and non-statistically significant at 12 months. There was a small improvement in diet scores at 6 months (DiD 0.78 (0.10 to 1.47); p=0.026) but not at 12 months. There were no differences in eHealth literacy, physical activity scores, body mass index, weight, waist circumference or blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted recruitment and engagement were challenging in this population. While the intervention was associated with some improvements in health literacy and diet, substantial differences in other outcomes were not observed. More intensive interventions

Background: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is a core skillset for enhancing the quality and safety of patients’ care. Online EBM education could improve clinicians’ skills in EBM, particularly when it is conducted during vocational training. There are limited studies on the impact of online EBM training on clinical practice among general practitioner (GP) registrars (trainees in specialist general practice). We aimed to describe and evaluate the acceptability, utility, satisfaction and applicability of the GP registrars experience with the online course. The course was developed by content-matter experts with educational designers to encompass effective teaching methods (e.g. it was interactive and used multiple teaching methods). Methods: Mixed-method data collection was conducted after individual registrars’ completion of the course. The course comprised six modules that aimed to increase knowledge of research methods and application of EBM skills to everyday practice. GP registrars who completed the online course during 2016–2020 were invited to complete an online survey about their experience and satisfaction with the course. Those who completed the course within the six months prior to data collection were invited to participate in semi-structured phone interviews about their experience with the course and the impact of the course on clinical practice. A thematic analysis approach was used to analyse the data from qualitative interviews. Results: The data showed the registrars were generally positive towards the course and the concept of EBM. They stated that the course improved their confidence, knowledge, and skills and consequently impacted their practice. The students perceived the course increased their understanding of EBM with a Cohen’s d of 1.6. Registrars identified factors that influenced the impact of the course. Of those, some were GP-related including their perception of EBM, and being comfortable with what they already learnt; some were work-place

Background: People with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often experience mental health symptoms that exacerbate illness and increase mortality risk. Access to psychological support is low in people with T2DM. Detection of depression is variable in primary care and can be further hampered by mental health stigma. Electronic mental health (eMH) programs may provide an accessible, private, nonstigmatizing mental health solution for this group. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy over 12 months of follow-up of an eMH program (myCompass) for improving social and occupational functioning in a community sample of people with T2DM and self-reported mild-to-moderate depressive symptoms. myCompass is a fully automated and self-guided web-based public health program for people with depression or anxiety. The effects of myCompass on depressive symptoms, diabetes-related distress, anxiety symptoms, and self-care behavior were also examined. Methods: Adults with T2DM and mild-to-moderate depressive symptoms (N=780) were recruited via online advertisements, community organizations, and general practices. Screening, consent, and self-report questionnaires were administered online. Eligible participants were randomized to receive either myCompass (n=391) or an attention control generic health literacy program (Healthy Lifestyles; n=379) for 8 weeks. At baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months postintervention, participants completed the Work and Social Adjustment Scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item, the Diabetes Distress Scale, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire-7 item, and items from the Self-Management Profile for Type 2 Diabetes. Glycosylated hemoglobin measurements were obtained at baseline and 6 and 12 months postintervention. Results: A total of 38.9% (304/780) of the trial participants completed all postintervention assessments. myCompass users logged in on an average of 6 times and completed an average of 0.29 modules. Healthy Lifestyles use

Digital health applications (apps) have the potential to improve health behaviors and outcomes. We aimed to examine the effectiveness of a consumer web-based app linked to primary care electronic health records (EHRs). CONNECT was a multicenter randomized controlled trial involving patients with or at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) recruited from primary care (Clinical Trial registration ACTRN12613000715774). Intervention participants received an interactive app which was pre-populated and refreshed with EHR risk factor data, diagnoses and, medications. Interactive risk calculators, motivational messages and lifestyle goal tracking were also included. Control group received usual health care. Primary outcome was adherence to guideline-recommended medications (≥80% of days covered for blood pressure (BP) and statin medications). Secondary outcomes included attainment of risk factor targets and eHealth literacy. In total, 934 patients were recruited; mean age 67.6 (±8.1) years. At 12 months, the proportion with >80% days covered with recommended medicines was low overall and there was no difference between the groups (32.8% vs. 29.9%; relative risk [RR] 1.07 [95% CI, 0.88–1.20] p = 0.49). There was borderline improvement in the proportion meeting BP and LDL targets in intervention vs. control (17.1% vs. 12.1% RR 1.40 [95% CI, 0.97–2.03] p = 0.07). The intervention was associated with increased attainment of physical activity targets (87.0% intervention vs. 79.7% control, p = 0.02) and e-health literacy scores (72.6% intervention vs. 64.0% control, p = 0.02). In conclusion, a consumer app integrated with primary health care EHRs was not effective in increasing medication adherence. Borderline improvements in risk factors and modest behavior changes were observed.

Given the dearth of COPD self-management interventions that specifically acknowledge multi-morbidity in primary care, we aimed to activate COPD patients through personalised self-management support that recognised the implications of co-morbidities. This single-group experimental study included patients aged 40−84 with a spirometry diagnosis of COPD and at least one co-morbidity. A self-management education programme for COPD in the context of multi-morbidity, based on the Health Belief Model, was tailored and delivered to participants by general practice nurses in face-to-face sessions. At 6 months’ follow-up, there was significant improvement in patient activation (p < 0.001), COPD-related quality of life (p = 0.012), COPD knowledge (p < 0.001) and inhaler device technique (p = 0.001), with no significant change in perception of multi-morbidity (p = 0.822) or COPD-related multi-morbidity (0.084). The programme improved patients’ self-efficacy for their COPD as well as overall health behaviour. The findings form an empirical basis for further testing the programme in a large-scale randomised controlled trial.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD), including coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, is the leading cause of death and disability globally. A large proportion of mortality occurs in people with prior CHD and effective and scalable strategies are needed to prevent associated deaths and hospitalisations. The aim of this study is to determine if a practice-level collaborative quality improvement program, focused on patients with CHD, reduces the rate of unplanned CVD hospitalisations and major adverse cardiovascular events, and increases the proportion of patients achieving risk factor targets at 24 months. Methods: Cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of a primary care quality improvement program in 50 primary care practices (n~ 10,000 patients) with 24-month follow-up. Eligible practices will be randomised (1:1) to participate in either the intervention (collaborative quality improvement program) or control (standard care) regimens. Outcomes will be assessed based on randomised allocation, according to intention-to-treat. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with unplanned CVD hospitalisations at 2 years. Secondary outcomes are proportion of patients with major adverse cardiovascular events, proportion of patients who received prescriptions for guideline-recommended medicines, proportion of patients achieving national risk factor targets and proportion with a chronic disease management plan or review. Differences in the proportion of patients who are hospitalised (as well as binary secondary outcomes) will be analysed using logbinomial regression or robust Poisson regression, if necessary. (Continued on next page)

Depression is a common and debilitating condition. In Australia, general practitioners (GPs) are the key providers of depression care. However, available evidence suggests that case finding for depression in primary care is poor. This study will examine whether a systematic approach to screening for depression and assessing patient preferences for depression care improves depression outcomes among primary care patients. Methods and analysis A cluster randomised controlled design will be used with general practice clinics randomly assigned to either the intervention (n=12) or usual care group (n=12). Patients who are aged 18 and older, presenting for general practice care, will be eligible to participate. Eighty-three participants will be recruited at each clinic. Participants will be asked to complete a baseline survey administered on a touch screen computer at their GP clinic, and then a follow-up survey at 3, 6 and 12 months. Those attending usual care practices will receive standard care. GPs at intervention practices will complete an online Clinical e-Audit, and will be provided with provider and patient-directed resources for depression care. Patients recruited at intervention practices who score 10 or above on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 will have feedback regarding their depression screening results and preferences for care provided to their GP. The primary analysis will compare the number of cases of depression between the intervention and control groups. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee, and registered with Human Research Ethics Committees of the University of Wollongong, Monash University and University of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications and conference presentations. Trial registration number ACTRN12618001139268; Pre-results.Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No c

INTRODUCTION: Depression is a common and debilitating condition. In Australia, general practitioners (GPs) are the key providers of depression care. However, available evidence suggests that case finding for depression in primary care is poor. This study will examine whether a systematic approach to screening for depression and assessing patient preferences for depression care improves depression outcomes among primary care patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised controlled design will be used with general practice clinics randomly assigned to either the intervention (n=12) or usual care group (n=12). Patients who are aged 18 and older, presenting for general practice care, will be eligible to participate. Eighty-three participants will be recruited at each clinic. Participants will be asked to complete a baseline survey administered on a touch screen computer at their GP clinic, and then a follow-up survey at 3, 6 and 12 months. Those attending usual care practices will receive standard care. GPs at intervention practices will complete an online Clinical e-Audit, and will be provided with provider and patient-directed resources for depression care. Patients recruited at intervention practices who score 10 or above on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 will have feedback regarding their depression screening results and preferences for care provided to their GP. The primary analysis will compare the number of cases of depression between the intervention and control groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee, and registered with Human Research Ethics Committees of the University of Wollongong, Monash University and University of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001139268; Pre-results.

Identification of mental health risk is important for optimising diabetes care in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Personality is linked to diabetes health and may assist detection of individuals with T2DM most at risk of chronic mental health difficulties. This study examined the moderator effect of personality factors on changes in psychological distress and functioning in adults with T2DM and mild-to-moderate depressive symptoms across a 12-month period. Data were obtained from participants in a randomised controlled trial of adults with T2DM. Participants completed measures of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder-7), general functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale), diabetes distress (Diabetes Distress Scale), and diabetes self-management (Self-Management Profile for Type 2 Diabetes) at baseline, 3-, 6- and 12-months. Glycaemic control (HbA1c) was measured at baseline, 6- and 12-months. Two hundred trial completers agreed to complete a personality inventory (Big Five Inventory). Low neuroticism was linked with reduced depression, anxiety, functional impairment and diabetes distress over the year. High extraversion was associated with decreased anxiety and functional impairment. High conscientiousness was linked to increased healthy eating. No personality trait moderated HbA1c levels. Personality screening may help identify mental health risk and guide medical carer approach in T2DM patients.

OBJECTIVE:Overweight and obesity are universal health challenges. Recent evidence emphasises the potential benefits of addressing psychological factors associated with obesity in dietary programmes. This pilot study investigated the efficacy and acceptability of a combined online and face-to-face dietary intervention that used self-compassion, goal-setting and self-monitoring to improve dietary behaviour, as well as psychological factors associated with dietary behaviour. DESIGN:Embedded mixed methods including a 4-week before-after trial and a one-on-one interview. Quantitative outcomes of the study were the levels of self-compassion; eating pathology; depression, anxiety and stress; and dietary intake. Qualitative outcomes were participants' perceptions about the acceptability of the intervention. SETTING:UNSW Kensington campus. PARTICIPANTS:Fourteen participants with overweight and obesity aged between 18 and 55 years old. RESULTS:Results showed that the intervention significantly improved self-compassion and some aspects of dietary intake (e.g. decrease in energy intake) at Week Four compared with Week Zero. Some aspects of eating pathology also significantly decreased (e.g. Eating Concern). However, changes in self-compassion over the 4 weeks did not significantly predict Week Four study outcomes, except for level of stress. Most participants found self-compassion, goal-setting and self-monitoring to be essential for dietary behaviour change. However, participants also indicated that an online programme needed to be efficient, simple and interactive. CONCLUSIONS:In conclusion, the current study provides preliminary but promising findings of an effective and acceptable combined online and face-to-face intervention that used self-compassion, goal-setting and self-monitoring to improve dietary habits. However, the results need to be examined in future long-term randomised controlled trials.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD), including coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, is the leading cause of death and disability globally. A large proportion of mortality occurs in people with prior CHD and effective and scalable strategies are needed to prevent associated deaths and hospitalisations. The aim of this study is to determine if a practice-level collaborative quality improvement program, focused on patients with CHD, reduces the rate of unplanned CVD hospitalisations and major adverse cardiovascular events, and increases the proportion of patients achieving risk factor targets at 24 months. Methods: Cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of a primary care quality improvement program in 50 primary care practices (n~ 10,000 patients) with 24-month follow-up. Eligible practices will be randomised (1:1) to participate in either the intervention (collaborative quality improvement program) or control (standard care) regimens. Outcomes will be assessed based on randomised allocation, according to intention-to-treat. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with unplanned CVD hospitalisations at 2 years. Secondary outcomes are proportion of patients with major adverse cardiovascular events, proportion of patients who received prescriptions for guideline-recommended medicines, proportion of patients achieving national risk factor targets and proportion with a chronic disease management plan or review. Differences in the proportion of patients who are hospitalised (as well as binary secondary outcomes) will be analysed using logbinomial regression or robust Poisson regression, if necessary. Discussion Despite extensive research with surrogate outcomes, to the authors’ knowledge, this is the first randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a data-driven collaborative quality improvement intervention on hospitalisations, CVD events and cardiovascular risk amongst patients with CHD in the primary